On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 09:37:13AM -0800, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> I assume you have your own setjmp implementation and are not using the
> libc version?
Nope, that would be the next step if this turned out to be untenable,
which I guess it is.
> If you don't then there is a problem. There is a good reason why the
> constants are removed: you couldn't use the values anyway. Your don't
> have the information to "decrypt" them.
You're actually encrypting them somehow? How? And why?
Is there a reason there can't be an API for looking at the contents of
a jmp_buf?
Jeff
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
