Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 13:04:08 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: liamfoy@sepulcrum.org Cc: i386@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [current tinderbox] failure on i386/i386 Message-ID: <20040625.130408.122318525.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20040625173503.3f8c2b0c.liamfoy@sepulcrum.org> References: <20040625162945.5f67d584.liamfoy@sepulcrum.org> <xzppt7nzjjd.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040625173503.3f8c2b0c.liamfoy@sepulcrum.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
In message: <20040625173503.3f8c2b0c.liamfoy@sepulcrum.org>
"Liam J. Foy" <liamfoy@sepulcrum.org> writes:
: On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 18:31:18 +0200
: des@des.no (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) wrote:
:
: > "Liam J. Foy" <liamfoy@sepulcrum.org> writes:
: > > I think this should solve the problem, correct me if am wrong. =)
: >
: > No, that just shoves it under the carpet.
: Maybe you could explain why ?
Because it just initializes the variable without understanding WHY it
is uninitialized, or what the right default value might be.
Warner
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040625.130408.122318525.imp>