a tty device instead of the legacy minor number approach. This is known to
fix gnome-vfs' sftp module as well as kio_sftp and kdesu on -CURRENT.
Thanks to scottl for the snprintf() approach idea.
Reviewed by: phk
Tested by: pav
mich
Approved by: re (scottl)
surrounding the undef'ing it. It does not seem necessary to
undef some symbol that is not exist, and gcc does not complain
about whether a symbol is exist before #undef'ing it out.
Spotted by: mingyanguo via ChinaUnix.net forum
Reviewed by: phk
really so.
"If the value of base is 16, the characters 0x or 0X may optionally
precede the sequence of letters and digits, following the sign if
present."
Found by: joerg
seed, the random number generator rand(3) still sucks and is unlikely
sufficient for crypto use. Correct what appears to be a cut and paste
error from the srandomdev() man page.
Submitted by: Ben Mesander
example. The externs haven't been needed in about 10 years, so
there's no reason to have them other than for hysterical raisins. And
the California Rasins haven't been around for a long time...
under the RETURN VALUES section so it is consistent with others.
Cleanup the return value text for getenv(3) a little while I am here.
PR: docs/58033
MFC after: 3 days
cleanups, handling 'ls -l-', handling '--*'
Note this is in the same time back out of our v1.3
"Don't print an error message if the bad option is '?'"
because it directly violates POSIX.
through a realloc like function.
Make the malloc_active variable a local static to this new function.
Don't warn about recursion more than once per base call.
constify malloc_func.
has been hit, this makes it cover more cases.
Call the message function directly rather than fiddle with flag-saving
when we find an unknown character in our options.
The 'A' flag should not trigger on legal out of memory conditions.
These files had tags after the copyright notice,
inside the comment block (incorrect, removed),
and outside the comment block (correct).
Approved by: rwatson (mentor)
This results in no functional change, aside from fixing a data
corruption bug on LP64 platforms. The code here could still use a
significant amount of cleanup.
PR: 56502
Submitted by: hrs (earlier version)
ó++ ABI document at http://www.codesourcery.com/cxx-abi/abi.html#dso-dtor
The ABI was initially defined for ia64, but GCC3 and Intel compilers
have adopted it on other platforms.
This is the patch from PR bin/59552 with a number of changes by
me.
PR: bin/59552
Submitted by: Bradley T Hughes (bhughes at trolltech dot com)
C++ ABI document at http://www.codesourcery.com/cxx-abi/abi.html#dso-dtor
The ABI was initially defined for ia64, but GCC3 and Intel compilers
have adopted it on other platforms.
This is the patch from PR bin/59552 with a number of changes by
me.
PR: bin/59552
Submitted by: Bradley T Hughes (bhughes at trolltech dot com)
initialization overhead, there's a problem in that we never call
imalloc() and thus malloc_init() for zero-sized allocations. As a
result, malloc(0) returns NULL when it's the first or only malloc in
the program. Any non-zero allocation will initialize the malloc code
with the side-effect that subsequent zero-sized allocations return a
non-NULL pointer. This is because the pointer we return for zero-
sized allocations is calculated from malloc_pageshift, which needs
to be initialized at runtime on ia64.
The result of the inconsistent behaviour described above is that
configure scripts failed the test for a GNU compatible malloc. This
resulted in a lot of broken ports.
Other, even simpler, solutions were possible as well:
1. initialize malloc_pageshift with some non-zero value (say 13 for
8KB pages) and keep the runtime adjustment.
2. Stop using malloc_pageshift to calculate ZEROSIZEPTR.
Removal of the runtime adjustment was chosen because then ia64 is the
same as any other platform. It is not to say that using a page size
obtained at runtime is bad per se. It's that there's currently a high
level of gratuity for its existence and the moment it causes problems
is the moment you need to get rid of it. Hence, it's not unthinkable
that this commit is (partially) reverted some time in the future when
we do have a good reason for it and a good way to achieve it.
Approved by: re@ (rwatson)
Reported by: kris (portmgr@) -- may the ports be with you
