Re: Constant byteorder macros.

From: Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Date: Sat Jan 22 2000 - 09:28:05 EST

  • Next message: Ville Herva: "Also 14, 14pre1[345] Re: Unkillable processes with 2.2.12/2.2.13pre17"

    > Again, I can imagine people trying to compile Linux on other architectures
    > with, say, the DEC/OSF1 Alpha compiler, or some custom CPU-specific compiler
    > for their architecture du-jour, or with lcc (because they're FSF-phobic), or
    > with some generic C analysis tool (to prove things about the code;
    > to benchmark their research optimizer).

    And they can fix it. Playing "guess the future needs" like that is pointless.
    Your byteorder stuff just makes bcc throw up anyway so it wouldnt have helped
    the 8086 guys to have avoided gnuisms
     
    Alan

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 23 2000 - 00:05:03 EST