In message <Pine.LNX.4.62L.0809272303550.17022(a)uglogin.ecs.soton.ac.uk> you wrote:
22:44:02 <@jmb> and, the reason that got reverted is because
unixlib/sigstate.h defines __write_backtrace, which we
22:44:22 <@jmb> can we *please* get unixlib sorted in that area
22:44:37 <@jmb> or do we get to reinvent the backtracing wheel
In addition to this, if we assume that NS 2.0 must build correctly with
-Werror enabled, the above change blocks any 2.0 release as it introduces
a build warning.
I would rather not have to reinvent backtrace emission in NS itself.
It's beyond me quite why write_backtrace isn't public UnixLib API
already as it's hugely useful, especially given the dearth of decent
debug tools on RO.
Sorry, this is a misunderstanding. If there is a desire to make some
useful internal UnixLib routines or variables exposed, then lets have
a communication on that and go forward. I simply didn't know a similar
change got reverted and thought to be helpful to make NS and its new
libraries GCCSDK 4 build compatible again. :-(
BTW, __dynamic_num is no longer defined in UnixLib 5 and this is recently
in use by NS. Is there a real need to have UnixLib's DA area saved or
rather just 'could be useful' value ?