From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Thu Jul 16 10:22:15 2009 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at demon.co.uk Subject: Re: [MiNT] [Mint-cvs] [FreeMiNT CVS] lib/gemma/src From: Alan Hourihane To: Konrad Kokoszkiewicz Cc: mint@fishpool.com In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:13:07 +0100 Message-Id: <1247753587.29005.23.camel@server.demon.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: alanh@fairlite.co.uk Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 15:19 +0200, Konrad Kokoszkiewicz wrote: > > Index: lib/gemma/src/rsrc.c > > diff -u lib/gemma/src/rsrc.c:1.6 lib/gemma/src/rsrc.c:1.7 > > --- lib/gemma/src/rsrc.c:1.6 Sun Dec 28 16:47:19 2003 > > +++ lib/gemma/src/rsrc.c Wed Jul 8 16:06:27 2009 > > @@ -71,7 +71,8 @@ > > r = _alloc(proc->rsclength); > > if (r <= 0) > > goto fault; > > - wrsc = (ushort *)proc->rawrscaddr = (char *)r; > > + wrsc = (ushort *)proc->rawrscaddr; > > + wrsc = (char *)r; > > Whoever did this, this looks like a mistake, as the old code and the new > code are not equivalent. What's the value of proc->rawrscaddr after the > execution of the new code? Whoops. I'll fix that. > I also don't understand the reference to -fwritable-strings (in the > comment, absent here). IIRC, the library allocates all buffers from the > memory, as here. Research GCC. -fwritable-strings was in the Makefile and it's now gone as later GCC's don't support this flag. Alan.