On 6/30/08 10:11 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: >One of my anxiety is that the sizes obtained by AC_CHECK_SIZEOF() >would be more reliable than the sizes deduced by limits.h (although >yet I've not checked the detail that how configure script checks >the sizes). > >I want to check the sizes by AC_CHECK_SIZEOF() and compare them >with the sizes deduced by limits.h - if any inconsistency is found, >AC_CHECK_SIZEOF() results should be used. Werner, how do you think?
I would think that using a configure script check would be problematic for Mac OS X Universal Binary builds. A configure script check is run only once, correct? So if one builds 4-way universal (ppc, ppc64, i386, x86_64) the check will give wrong results for some architectures. In my experience, using configure-time tests is highly problematic for cross compiling. Can freetype use C99 features? In C99 there are exact-width integer types like int64_t, uint32_t, etc. See 'stdint.h'. BTW, <bits/wordsize.h> does not seem to exist on Mac OS X. -- ____________________________________________________________ Sean McBride, B. Eng [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rogue Research www.rogue-research.com Mac Software Developer Montréal, Québec, Canada _______________________________________________ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel