| 1 |
LOL! |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
That must be for the folk that don't mind patching glibc, but will get |
| 4 |
upset if memcpy does strange things. :) |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
On 7/23/05, Matt Randolph <mattr@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 7 |
> Oh, and I take no responsibility for any damages to anyone or anything |
| 8 |
> arising from the use of the revised memcpy.c or software produced from |
| 9 |
> it. It may contain further errors that I don't know about. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Matt Randolph wrote: |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> > There is a bug in the original memcpy.c that will cause a segfault if |
| 14 |
> > you don't pass it any parameters. Here is a fixed version. I've left |
| 15 |
> > everything else alone (except for a spelling correction). |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> -- |
| 20 |
> "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate" - W. of O. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> -- |
| 23 |
> gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives