On Wednesday 13 February 2008, Christian MICHON wrote: > seriously, back to the issue. I understand from the thread:
you dont then > 1) gcc used to work the toolchain was always broken. newer flags were added to the trylink script which the older toolchain did not support. the fact that newer checks triggered the bug is irrelevant. the toolchain was always broken. > It just happened to me too. But I'm sure my toolchain is not broken, > because it's working fine usually. wrong. daily observations make no absolute statements. just because you havent managed to trigger the bug doesnt mean the bug magically does not exist. > my 2 cents. and this fix will be in the next release of DetaolB (based > on old but reliable gcc-3.4.6, link in my signature) ah but once again you'd be wrong. gcc-3.4.6 clearly has the bug where it will unlink /dev/null in the case of certain errors. why dont you actually look at the code. the issue wasnt resolved in gcc proper until the gcc-4.1 series. i know because i implemented the fixes in gcc-3.3, gcc-3.4, and gcc-4.0 for Gentoo. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
