On Tue, 2004-06-15 at 21:52 +0300, Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > On Sun, 2004-06-13 at 17:06 +0300, Ognyan Kulev wrote:
> >>It seems that some Linux code is copied into pid_is_user function by
> >>accident. Patch is applied.
> >
> > Is this the cause of #133640 being reopened?
>
> Only part of patch in #133640 is applied and here is the result:
>
> (1) HURD_IHASH_ITERATE is used and start-stop-daemon.c is not compiled
> with -std=gnu99. This means that this source file is uncompilable under
> the Hurd. In the original patch, -std=gnu99 was enabled only for
> start-stop-daemon.c.
>
I rejected this part of the patch and requested replacement code that
does not require C99.
> (2) pid_is_{user,cmd} is called before do_procinit and most probably
> this is the reason for the SEGV (because procset global variable is not
> initialized). In the original patch, do_procinit was turned into
> constructor and so procset is always initalized.
>
I rejected this part of the patch and requested that this initialisation
be performed without using a constructor.
> I'll work on these both issues tomorrow and I will submit patch that
> won't use constructor or C99 features, and will contain some other minor
> changes too.
>
Thanks.
Scott
--
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part