Hi Anthony,
Anthony G. Basile wrote,
> From: "Anthony G. Basile"
>
> On systems where uClibc doesn't provide an arch specific byteswap.h,
> we fall back on bits/byteswap-common.h. However, there is a bug
> in this header in the __bswap_constant_64(x) macro. If, for
From: "Anthony G. Basile"
On systems where uClibc doesn't provide an arch specific byteswap.h,
we fall back on bits/byteswap-common.h. However, there is a bug
in this header in the __bswap_constant_64(x) macro. If, for example,
a double is passed, we get 'invalid operands
On 3/25/16 6:35 AM, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
> Hi Anthony,
> Anthony G. Basile wrote,
>
>> From: "Anthony G. Basile"
>>
>> On systems where uClibc doesn't provide an arch specific byteswap.h,
>> we fall back on bits/byteswap-common.h. However, there is a bug
>> in this
From: "Anthony G. Basile"
On systems where uClibc doesn't provide an arch specific byteswap.h,
we fall back on bits/byteswap-common.h. However, there is a bug
in this header in the __bswap_constant_64(x) macro. If, for example,
a double is passed, we get "invalid operands