Today actually. http://git.kernel.org/gitweb.cgi?p=libs/libunwind/libunwind.git;a=commit;h=bb9d3dc6893536132929add38dc52cbf2dbb201c
-Arun On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:45 PM, Mark Rabkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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
