On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Alistair Crooks wrote:
+.ifndef PRINTOBJDIR
+PRINTOBJDIR=${MAKE} -V .OBJDIR
+.endif
At least for NetBSD's make(1), you need ${MAKE} -V '${.OBJDIR}' to
get the recursively-expanded value of .OBJDIR. ${MAKE} -V .OBJDIR
would print the unexpanded value.
Oh, you'd better
In article 20141030012621.0982...@cvs.netbsd.org,
Masao Uebayashi source-changes-d@NetBSD.org wrote:
Re: constructors/destructors:
Using them will create a portability constraint on elf. This has
the implication that rump will not work on some platforms.
christos
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Christos Zoulas chris...@astron.com wrote:
In article 20141030012621.0982...@cvs.netbsd.org,
Masao Uebayashi source-changes-d@NetBSD.org wrote:
Re: constructors/destructors:
Using them will create a portability constraint on elf. This has
the implication
On Oct 30, 11:14am, uebay...@gmail.com (Masao Uebayashi) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/usr.bin/config
| Could you show me an example failure senario? What do you propose instead?
I don't have anything *better* to propose. I think mach-o constructors
are different.
| I heard that rump
On Oct 29, 2014, at 7:30 PM, Christos Zoulas chris...@zoulas.com wrote:
On Oct 30, 11:14am, uebay...@gmail.com (Masao Uebayashi) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/usr.bin/config
| Could you show me an example failure senario? What do you propose instead?
I don't have anything
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Matt Thomas m...@3am-software.com wrote:
arm doesn’t use .ctors/.dtors
it has init/fini array instead.
The section names don't really matter. Probably .kctors/.kdtors are
less confusing (+ to avoid confliction with rump).
and where would they be executed?
