Special-coding x86_64 is unacceptable. I have a proposed patch pending for
0.9.31ff, will CFT ASAP.

On 25 Apr 2010 20:59, "Roman I Khimov" <[email protected]> wrote:

В сообщении от Воскресенье 25 апреля 2010 21:34:14 автор Austin Foxley
написал:

> On 04/25/2010 06:35 AM, [email protected] wrote:

> > In previous uclibc versions we've had fcntl64 (nonexisting on x86_64) as
> > an alias to fcntl. ...

> What about other 64bit archs?
At quick glance most of them have no fcntl64, although looks like sh64 does.


> And you're right, we probably want a different solution to this.
Sure, this is mostly to raise the issue and solve it at least internally.
It's
been a long time since I've touched uclibc code, so I'm very unsure about
how
to fix it properly. Most probably still in headers (re-adding fcntl64 alias
seems ugly to me) though.

--
 http://roman.khimov.ru
mailto: [email protected]
gpg --keyserver hkp://subkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 0xE5E055C3

_______________________________________________
uClibc mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
_______________________________________________
uClibc mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc

Reply via email to