2009/7/18 Kenneth J. Davis :
> It has to deal with debugging the kernel, especially during
> initialization. I choose this method as the kernel does not usually
> have many strings it prints except when built with DEBUG and the
> alternative is to determine exactly which portions of the C code and
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Bart
Oldeman wrote:
> Jeremy,
>
> I was wondering what your reasoning is for changing
It has to deal with debugging the kernel, especially during
initialization. I choose this method as the kernel does not usually
have many strings it prints except when built wit
2009/7/18 Kenneth J. Davis :
> I was just checking my email and about to work on an issue with the
> usb stack from Bret Johnson. Does this change effect/fix the issues
> with this (from the description it looks like it does - as the problem
> was described as FAT32 specific issue with the kernel
I was just checking my email and about to work on an issue with the
usb stack from Bret Johnson. Does this change effect/fix the issues
with this (from the description it looks like it does - as the problem
was described as FAT32 specific issue with the kernel and related to
the buildbpb call) or
Jeremy,
I was wondering what your reasoning is for changing
int VA_CDECL printf(const char *fmt, ...)
to
int VA_CDECL printf(CONST char FAR *fmt, ...)
are there any format strings that need to be far? Because for just
printing a far string s it's better to use
printf("%S", s);
because printf(s) g
