From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: Re: `print' does not print Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 07:48:26 +0200 (IST) Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <15519.38800.293116.554526@jupiter.akutech-local.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1017121876 7614 127.0.0.1 (26 Mar 2002 05:51:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 05:51:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, drk@bobo.hudson.sgi.com Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16pjrY-0001yh-00 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 06:51:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16pjrW-0003rD-00; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 00:51:14 -0500 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16pjpt-0003lv-00; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 00:49:34 -0500 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA23144; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 07:48:26 +0200 (IST) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: Ralf Fassel In-Reply-To: <15519.38800.293116.554526@jupiter.akutech-local.de> Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:182 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs:182 On Mon, 25 Mar 2002, Ralf Fassel wrote: > The printing runtime problem goes away on 6.5.9 and 6.5.15 if I dump > on 6.5.15. Great, so it seems that the SGI-specific patch in unexelf.c is unnecessary and even dangerous, and should be taken out. Thanks for your help in debugging this. > What is left to check is whether it also goes away if one > would apply the SGI patch for the runtime environment of 6.5.9 and > dump there. But since the machine running 6.5.9 is critical for our > daily operation, I'll have to wait for the upcoming holidays to > patch/upgrade. If time permits, I will check whether the patches > solve the problem too. Thanks. If the patches do work, please tell me what patches are needed, so I could list them in etc/MACHINES and etc/PROBLEMS.