Mark, Thanks. I missed that fine point.
John On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 08:41, Mark A. Carlson wrote: > Going by the FOSS checklist in the case directory: > > 3.2 Libraries - N/A > Are 64-bit libraries being delivered? > [X] Yes > [ ] No - ARC review required > > I would say yes. > > -- mark > > John Fischer wrote: > > Nico, > > > > Right. However, my question is still does the project > > provide a 64-bit library? > > > > Thanks, > > > > John > > > > > > On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 07:59, Nicolas Williams wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 07:51:43AM -0800, John Fischer wrote: > > > > > > > I am assuming that since there is a 64-bit include file > > > > that the project will be providing a 64-bit library. Is > > > > that a correct assumption? > > > > > > > There's no such thing as a 64-bit include file. Some of the include > > > files have '64' in their name. But you knew that, and I'm not here to > > > pick nits. The names seem to imply that they are either internal > > > headers (in which case: why are they being delivered?) or else consumers > > > need to access certain types or what have you that differ according to > > > the either the CPUs that are available or, more likely, the instruction > > > used by the application (in which case your question is quite right). > > > > > > Nico > > > -- > > > > >
