Thomas Schwinge, le Sun 19 Nov 2006 22:59:29 +0000, a écrit :
> | #v+
> | [...]
> | void
> | -_dl_init_first (int argc, ...)
> | +_dl_init_first (void)
> | {
> | first_init ();
> |
> | - init (&argc);
> | + init ((int *) __builtin_frame_address (0) + 2);
> | }
> | [...]
> | #v-
>
>
> So, how can this be explained?The old version looks much more safe to me. Samuel _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
