On Wed, Nov 27 2013, david at tethera.net wrote:
> From: David Bremner
>
> Unfortunately old versions of GCC and clang do not provide byte order
> macros, so we re-invent them.
>
> If UTIL_BYTE_ORDER is not defined or defined to 0, we fall back to
> macros supported by recent versions of GCC and
Tomi Ollila writes:
>
> You may want to amend the '#' out of the line
>
> +#rm -f _byteorder _byteorder.c
>
done and pushed.
d
Tomi Ollila writes:
>
> You may want to amend the '#' out of the line
>
> +#rm -f _byteorder _byteorder.c
>
done and pushed.
d
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
On Wed, Nov 27 2013, da...@tethera.net wrote:
> From: David Bremner
>
> Unfortunately old versions of GCC and clang do not provide byte order
> macros, so we re-invent them.
>
> If UTIL_BYTE_ORDER is not defined or defined to 0, we fall back to
> macros supported by recent versions of GCC and cla
From: David Bremner
Unfortunately old versions of GCC and clang do not provide byte order
macros, so we re-invent them.
If UTIL_BYTE_ORDER is not defined or defined to 0, we fall back to
macros supported by recent versions of GCC and clang
---
I think I got all of Tomi's comments, including the
From: David Bremner
Unfortunately old versions of GCC and clang do not provide byte order
macros, so we re-invent them.
If UTIL_BYTE_ORDER is not defined or defined to 0, we fall back to
macros supported by recent versions of GCC and clang
---
I think I got all of Tomi's comments, including the