From owner-freebsd-current Fri Oct 29 20:57:32 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25A5F14D4E for ; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 20:57:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@wintelcom.net) Received: from localhost (bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA08114; Fri, 29 Oct 1999 21:20:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 21:20:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Alfred Perlstein To: Doug White Cc: Ben Rosengart , Randy Bush , FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: -stable to -current In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 29 Oct 1999, Doug White wrote: > On Fri, 29 Oct 1999, Ben Rosengart wrote: > > > On Fri, 29 Oct 1999, Doug White wrote: > > > > > I still hate the way the signal change was handled. > > > > How would you have done it differently? As I understand it, the pain > > was more or less inevitable. > > Perhaps, but there must be a way to keep gcc from dying. > > I don't fully understand the mechanics involved so I will shut up until I > teach myself about the syscall handling and concoct a better solution :) Since there were syscalls added, the newly compiled gcc calls system calls in the kernel that don't exist... _yet_ I like the idea of some sort of date/version checking, but it's not being checked just yet. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message