Could you let us know when the fix is applied? I've encountered this as well and would love to grab the latest source.
On 4/15/08 11:08 PM, "Arun Sharma" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 7:03 PM, Paul Pluzhnikov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> - w1 &= 0xffffffff; >> - return (w0 == 0x0f0000000fc0c748 && w1 == 0x66666605); >> + w1 &= 0xff; >> + return (w0 == 0x0f0000000fc0c748 && w1 == 0x05); > > Your fix looks right to me. David, please apply. > > Longer term, we should use dwarf augmentations to match signal frames though. > > -Arun > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Libunwind-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libunwind-devel
_______________________________________________ Libunwind-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libunwind-devel
