Keith M Wesolowski wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 05:09:33PM +1300, Ian Collins wrote: > > Standard violating code? I'm shocked! > > > > How does this work with the gcc build, are compile options used so > > string literals do not go in read only pages? > > Mostly we fixed all these that we found (and when building with gcc, > -xstrconst is effectively enabled by default). A few places we added > -fwritable-strings because we didn't own the code or the people who do > didn't want to go to the trouble of fixing it. > > I'll bet money there's still at least one SEGV from this lurking > somewhere in ON.
I guess there may even be more around. But I don't think it's a good idea to make this a "blocker" for such an OS/Net tree-wide change. IMO it's better to do the change ASAP (with lots of PIT before the putback to make sure we get a useable system as result) because it would give us lots of time to find all the problems. ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
