On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 01:22:46AM +0200, ext Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Before this fix, the u64 type would not be defined, causing
x86emu/sys.c to fail to build:
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: ldq_u
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: *
Since Keith requested using
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 16:08:06 +0300, Tiago Vignatti tiago.vigna...@nokia.com
wrote:
Watching the other replies from Keith, I've seen he's not so enthusiastic with
the idea of not use stdint.h. Anyway, if this patch arrives on xserver, I'll
be pushing to my libx86 tree either.
Right, I think
Before this fix, the u64 type would not be defined, causing
x86emu/sys.c to fail to build:
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: ldq_u
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: *
Since Keith requested using stdint.h, converted all the x86emu
typedefs to use the stdint types.
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Alan Coopersmith
alan.coopersm...@oracle.com wrote:
Before this fix, the u64 type would not be defined, causing
x86emu/sys.c to fail to build:
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: ldq_u
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: *
Since Keith
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 02:03:53AM +0100, ext Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Before this fix, the u64 type would not be defined, causing
x86emu/sys.c to fail to build:
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: ldq_u
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: *
Since 64-bit types are now
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 18:03:53 -0700, Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com
wrote:
Since 64-bit types are now required by x86emu, assumes all platforms
either have a 64-bit long or a 64-bit long long (defined by C99).
Don't we assume stdint.h exists yet?
--
keith.pack...@intel.com
Keith Packard wrote:
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 18:03:53 -0700, Alan Coopersmith
alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote:
Since 64-bit types are now required by x86emu, assumes all platforms
either have a 64-bit long or a 64-bit long long (defined by C99).
Don't we assume stdint.h exists yet?
Not yet -
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 06:12:52 -0700, Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com
wrote:
Not yet - and I didn't dig to find out why, but some of the x86emu files
that include this specifically avoid including system headers. (Could
be more of the ancient xf86 module loader sillyness or
Before this fix, the u64 type would not be defined, causing
x86emu/sys.c to fail to build:
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: ldq_u
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: *
Since 64-bit types are now required by x86emu, assumes all platforms
either have a 64-bit long or a 64-bit
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 18:20 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Before this fix, the u64 type would not be defined, causing
x86emu/sys.c to fail to build:
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: ldq_u
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: *
Since 64-bit types are now required by
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Alan Coopersmith
alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote:
Before this fix, the u64 type would not be defined, causing
x86emu/sys.c to fail to build:
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: ldq_u
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: *
Since 64-bit types are
Before this fix, the u64 type would not be defined, causing
x86emu/sys.c to fail to build:
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: ldq_u
sys.c, line 102: syntax error before or at: *
Since 64-bit types are now required by x86emu, assumes all platforms
either have a 64-bit long or a 64-bit
12 matches
Mail list logo
