On Sun, 2002/07/14 at 13:43:37 -0700, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> [i am deliberately not trimming the email in case someone wants to
> look at the context]
> i am a bit dubious about your explaination -- it also does not
> explain why the person reporting this problem "fixed" that
> by swapping "timestamp" and "next_rule" in the structure

It does - doing so removes the need for padding before 'next_rule',
because it is properly aligned then. 'timestamp' and 'cmd' are both 4
bytes in size and immediately follow each other, so the total
structure size is a multiple of 8 (48 bytes). Because of that, no
padding after 'cmd' is required, and the effect is gone.

        - thomas

Thomas Moestl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0015675/
              <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://people.FreeBSD.org/~tmm/
PGP fingerprint: 1C97 A604 2BD0 E492 51D0  9C0F 1FE6 4F1D 419C 776C

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to