Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 03:26:01 +0400 From: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@...linux.org> To: owl-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: strace On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 01:01:33PM +0400, Solar Designer wrote: > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 02:31:17AM +0400, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > > The morale is simple: avoid using "struct pt_regs" on i386, it may bite > > when you expect it less. > > So, who is going to fix strace in Owl-current, and in what way? For I see two options, either to apply strace-4.7-i386_regs.diff proposed by Pavel (the patch is definitely correct and could be applied without additional testing), or build a snapshot from strace.git HEAD (commit 07f022903e077a04fefd0c6132a706b7a50a7067 at this moment). The first variant is straightforward, anybody who remembers how to use cvs can do it. The second variant is not as risky as it may sound because strace.git HEAD is quite stable now. I suppose I can manage it despite of my rusty cvs skills, I was going to test strace-4.8 (planned to be released in May) on Owl-current before the release anyway. -- ldv Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.