> On 7 Mar 2018, at 17:11, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>
>>
>> Interesting and creative follow up on our discussion :-)
>>
>>> On 7 Mar 2018, at 12:08, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>>>
>>> Assuming the packing of structure can be a portability issue.
>>>
>
> Interesting and creative follow up on our discussion :-)
>
> > On 7 Mar 2018, at 12:08, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> >
> > Assuming the packing of structure can be a portability issue.
> > Currently there are no real-world ABI that would break these structure
> > however to
Interesting and creative follow up on our discussion :-)
> On 7 Mar 2018, at 12:08, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>
> Assuming the packing of structure can be a portability issue.
> Currently there are no real-world ABI that would break these structure
> however to be safe force a
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 11:08:58AM +, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> Assuming the packing of structure can be a portability issue.
> Currently there are no real-world ABI that would break these structure
> however to be safe force a 4 byte packing.
I don't think this is a "4 byte packing",
Assuming the packing of structure can be a portability issue.
Currently there are no real-world ABI that would break these structure
however to be safe force a 4 byte packing.
Signed-off-by: Frediano Ziglio
---
spice/Makefile.am | 2 ++
spice/end-packed4.h | 38