PM
*To:* Developer support list for Wireshark
*Subject:* Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-commits] rev
25171:/trunk/epan/dissectors/ /trunk/epan/dissectors/: packet-umts_fp.c
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Luis EG Ontanon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Log:
Fixed some old problems found while starting to add R7 support.
+186 -33 packet-umts_fp.cModified
I expect that the next buildbot Windows compile of packet-umts_fp will
fail (since it does on my Windows system):
packet-umts_fp.c(861) : warning
Bill Meier wrote:
I expect that the next buildbot Windows compile of packet-umts_fp will
fail (since it does on my Windows system):
packet-umts_fp.c(861) : warning C4244: 'function' : conversion from
'unsigned __int64 ' to 'unsigned int ', possible
s of data
Generating Code...
NMAKE :
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 8:08 PM, Guy Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Meier wrote:
I expect that the next buildbot Windows compile of packet-umts_fp will
fail (since it does on my Windows system):
packet-umts_fp.c(861) : warning C4244: 'function' : conversion from
'unsigned
Martin Mathieson wrote:
Does anyone know of a gcc flag we can add to catch cases like this? It
(obviously) compiled clean on my work machine.
I have a vague memory that newer versions of GCC (4.2? 4.3?) might have
a -W flag to catch implicit narrowing conversations, but I didn't see
Guy Harris wrote:
Martin Mathieson wrote:
Does anyone know of a gcc flag we can add to catch cases like this? It
(obviously) compiled clean on my work machine.
I have a vague memory that newer versions of GCC (4.2? 4.3?) might have
a -W flag to catch implicit narrowing
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Jeff Morriss
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guy Harris wrote:
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~wychen/cs261/proposal.htm
If Figure 1 is really a problem then my understanding of C just went out
the window...
I wouldn't have got this by myself without the
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Luis EG Ontanon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Jeff Morriss
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guy Harris wrote:
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~wychen/cs261/proposal.htmhttp://www.cs.berkeley.edu/%7Ewychen/cs261/proposal.htm
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 3:34 AM, Jeff Morriss [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I get what he's saying but I just don't get it: why would the compiler
convert from int to unsigned short *before* it has to send the value into
the call to dowork()? E.g., 'x' should be an int until I (explicitly or
);
} /* read_from_network() */
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Morriss
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 9:34 PM
To: Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-commits] rev
25171:/trunk/epan
10 matches
Mail list logo
