Keith Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Originally sent to the maintainer of the i386 math-emu code
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) but that mail was bounced[1]. Is anybody
> maintaining the math-emu code and do we even care about it anymore?
I can take a patch, but I would prefer if it was tested
e.g.
Originally sent to the maintainer of the i386 math-emu code
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) but that mail was bounced[1]. Is anybody
maintaining the math-emu code and do we even care about it anymore?
I am doing static code analysis on the kernel and have found a stack
imbalance in
Originally sent to the maintainer of the i386 math-emu code
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) but that mail was bounced[1]. Is anybody
maintaining the math-emu code and do we even care about it anymore?
I am doing static code analysis on the kernel and have found a stack
imbalance in
Keith Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Originally sent to the maintainer of the i386 math-emu code
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) but that mail was bounced[1]. Is anybody
maintaining the math-emu code and do we even care about it anymore?
I can take a patch, but I would prefer if it was tested
e.g. by
4 matches
Mail list logo
