Re: Re[2]: empty_zero_page definition clash in 2.0.36

1999-01-28 Thread MOLNAR Ingo
On Thu, 28 Jan 1999, Evgeny Stambulchik wrote: > > (just pedantic, but the right fix is to make it (char *) not (unsigned > > char *), because this is how it was defined and used previously. > > Hmm, I also used signed at the beginning, but then looked into 2.2.0 sources and > there it's unsi

Re[2]: empty_zero_page definition clash in 2.0.36

1999-01-28 Thread Evgeny Stambulchik
MOLNAR Ingo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -#define PARAM empty_zero_page > > +#define PARAM ((unsigned char *)empty_zero_page) > > (just pedantic, but the right fix is to make it (char *) not (unsigned > char *), because this is how it was defined and used previously. Hmm, I also used s