Before this fix, the u64 type would not be defined, causing
x86emu/sys.c to fail to build:
"sys.c", line 102: syntax error before or at: ldq_u
"sys.c", line 102: syntax error before or at: *

Since 64-bit types are now required by x86emu, assumes all platforms
either have a 64-bit long or a 64-bit long long (defined by C99).

Signed-off-by: Alan Coopersmith <alan.coopersm...@sun.com>
Acked-by: Adam Jackson <a...@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com>
---
 hw/xfree86/x86emu/x86emu/types.h |   16 ++++------------
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/xfree86/x86emu/x86emu/types.h b/hw/xfree86/x86emu/x86emu/types.h
index c18e11c..3e315c5 100644
--- a/hw/xfree86/x86emu/x86emu/types.h
+++ b/hw/xfree86/x86emu/x86emu/types.h
@@ -61,12 +61,6 @@
 
 /*---------------------- Macros and type definitions ----------------------*/
 
-/* Currently only for Linux/32bit */
-#undef  __HAS_LONG_LONG__
-#if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(NO_LONG_LONG)
-#define __HAS_LONG_LONG__
-#endif
-
 /* Taken from Xmd.h */
 #undef NUM32
 #if defined (_LP64) || \
@@ -77,23 +71,21 @@
     defined(__hppa__) && defined(__LP64) || \
     defined(__amd64__) || defined(amd64) 
 #define NUM32 int
+#define NUM64 long
 #else
 #define NUM32 long
+#define NUM64 long long
 #endif
 
 typedef unsigned char          u8;
 typedef unsigned short                 u16;
 typedef unsigned NUM32                 u32;
-#ifdef __HAS_LONG_LONG__
-typedef unsigned long long     u64;
-#endif
+typedef unsigned NUM64                 u64;
 
 typedef char                           s8;
 typedef short                          s16;
 typedef NUM32                          s32;
-#ifdef __HAS_LONG_LONG__
-typedef long long                      s64;
-#endif
+typedef NUM64                          s64;
 
 typedef unsigned int                   uint;
 typedef int                            sint;
-- 
1.5.6.5

_______________________________________________
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Reply via email to