On Thursday, December 15, 2005 04:37:19 PM +0100 Hartmut Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At least it seemed not to work without these 8 additional bytes.
That sure sounds like "Instead of analyzing the code to see what it was doing, I just randomly tried things until it didn't crash". This almost always indicates a bug, either in the new code or in the existing code you didn't analyze.
While the dynamic-allocation idea sounds good on the surface, I'm not really keen on accepting a patch which likely either contains a bug or triggers an existing one. Let's find the real source of the problem first.
-- Jeff _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
