Meador Inge <mead...@gmail.com> added the comment:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Mark Dickinson <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote:
> Mark Dickinson <dicki...@gmail.com> added the comment:
>
> I believe the problem is specific to machines still using the old ABI
> ('OABI'). Which ABI was being used on your test machine?
I tested the new ABI (armel). I will try the old ABI. However, after
reading over the ABI differences, the problems seem to be expected.
In particular:
"""
Struct packing and alignment
With the new ABI, default structure packing changes, as do some
default data sizes and alignment (which also have a knock-on effect on
structure packing). In particular the minimum size and alignment of a
structure was 4 bytes. Under the EABI there is no minimum and the
alignment is determined by the types of the components it contains.
This will break programs that know too much about the way structures
are packed and can break code that writes binary files by dumping and
reading structures.
"""
Once I get an OABI system up and running I will substantiate that
claim. I don't think there is going to be a bug fix here as I don't
think it is practical to support both ABIs. Just a "these tests are
expected to fail due to ABI differences x, y, z" kind of thing.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue7201>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
