On Thursday 04 January 2018 12:49:22 [email protected] wrote: > I wonder if we can count the number of SEGVs and if we get a few, turn > on the workaround?
How about turning on the workaround for any process that ignores or catches SEGV. Any process that is terminated by a SEGV should be safe, shouldn't it? --Phil -- Phil Nelson, http://pcnelson.net
