There is no bug here. "#pragma pack" isn't ignored on arm, it just doesn't
do what you expect it to. Try this; the second printf should yield the same
results on x86 and arm.
#pragma pack(2)
struct foo {
short a;
long b;
};
int main() {
struct foo f;
/* prints
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> Excellent! The long binutils compiles were triggering a bug in the Hurd,
> causing a crash, so I had to remove it from the autobuilder. I will
> add it back in now.
Thanks for letting me know this. All the more reason to get
cross-compiling situated a
On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, David Schleef wrote:
> Do you mean that you are removing the patches, or disabling them?
> I rather like the gcc-2.95 method of being native-only by default,
> but you can edit a few things and build cross-compilers yourself.
For now, I'm removing the patches. I am keeping
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 05:04:31PM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> I'm removing the cross-compiler patches to debian/rules, etc. as
> of the upcoming 2.11.90.0.5-1. Until we get a better method for compiling
> these, I'd rather not have the packages available. As it stands, it takes
> se
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 05:04:31PM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
>
> I'm removing the cross-compiler patches to debian/rules, etc. as
> of the upcoming 2.11.90.0.5-1. Until we get a better method for compiling
> these, I'd rather not have the packages available. As it stands, it takes
>
Just wanted to announce this...
I'm removing the cross-compiler patches to debian/rules, etc. as
of the upcoming 2.11.90.0.5-1. Until we get a better method for compiling
these, I'd rather not have the packages available. As it stands, it takes
several hours to build binutils and all of the cro
6 matches
Mail list logo
