RE: Linux process ABI broken in 2.6?

=20

=20
Joakim Tjernlund writes:
=20

quoted

Is it too much trouble to define r7 to always have
a zero
value at process startup?

=20
That's not much trouble, but what will you do for existing kernels?
Won't you have to do something like testing *r1 anyway?

No, I don't plan to do anything. I just got the first report that static
uClibc apps dosen't work for 2.6, so if the current kernel is fixed I
will just
point to a newer kernel or they can patch their old kernel with the
required 2 line fix.

 Thanks
         Jocke

=20
Paul.
=20
=20