Re: [HACKERS] 10beta1/m68k: static assertion failed: "MAXALIGN too small to fit int32"

2017-07-17 Thread Christoph Berg
Re: Heikki Linnakangas 2017-05-18 <5b9085c2-2c18-e5e3-c340-c07d11a9c...@iki.fi> > > Please go ahead, I don't think I have online access to a m68k machine. > > (It got demoted to an unofficial port some time ago and the old Debian > > porter machines got taken down). > > Ok, pushed, let's see if

Re: [HACKERS] 10beta1/m68k: static assertion failed: "MAXALIGN too small to fit int32"

2017-05-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 05/18/2017 12:31 PM, Christoph Berg wrote: Re: Heikki Linnakangas 2017-05-18 I'll commit that, barring objections. If you can verify that it fixes the problem before that, that'd be great, otherwise I guess we'll find out some time after the

Re: [HACKERS] 10beta1/m68k: static assertion failed: "MAXALIGN too small to fit int32"

2017-05-18 Thread Andres Freund
On 2017-05-18 10:48:48 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > If that's all that prevents it from working, by all means let's fix it. I > think this should do it, although I don't have a system to test it on: Yes, that's what I thought about doing too. > It adds a few instructions to check that on

Re: [HACKERS] 10beta1/m68k: static assertion failed: "MAXALIGN too small to fit int32"

2017-05-18 Thread Christoph Berg
Re: Heikki Linnakangas 2017-05-18 > I'll commit that, barring objections. If you can verify that it fixes the > problem before that, that'd be great, otherwise I guess we'll find out some > time after the commit. Please go ahead, I don't think I have

Re: [HACKERS] 10beta1/m68k: static assertion failed: "MAXALIGN too small to fit int32"

2017-05-18 Thread Heikki Linnakangas
On 05/17/2017 10:39 PM, Christoph Berg wrote: Not sure if a lot of people still care about m68k, but it's still one of the unofficial Debian ports (it used to be the first non-x86 port done decades ago): gcc -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels