This is the mail archive of the gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: wrong htons() used?

To: Grant Edwards <grante at visi dot com>
Subject: Re: wrong htons() used?
From: Scott Bambrough <scottb at netwinder dot org>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 11:10:04 -0400
CC: Grant dot Edwards at comtrol dot com, gdb at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
Organization: Rebel.com
References: <19991021151610.A3919@comtrol.com> <380F80F1.394F7493@netwinder.org> <19991021162144.A15266@comtrol.com> <380FB0FC.A5CE946F@cygnus.com> <19991022085150.A26689@comtrol.com> <3810789A.EE0C01AC@netwinder.org> <19991022095507.A4048@visi.com>

Grant Edwards wrote:
> 
> htons(x) with optimization on  reduces to (x)
> htons(x) with optimization off reduces to htons(x)
> 
> > The answer to this should tell you if __BYTE_ORDER == __BIG_ENDIAN
> > or __LITTLE_ENDIAN.
> 
> Apparently it is __BIG_ENDIAN.  Which is wrong, since it's a 386.
> 

Why not edit etherdrv.c and redefine __BYTE_ORDER to something else. 
The compiler might be nice enough to issue a warning about the
redefinition and tell you where the previous definition came from.

Scott

References:
- wrong htons() used?
  - From: Grant.Edwards
- Re: wrong htons() used?
  - From: Scott Bambrough
- Re: wrong htons() used?
  - From: Grant.Edwards
- Re: wrong htons() used?
  - From: Andrew Cagney
- Re: wrong htons() used?
  - From: Grant.Edwards
- Re: wrong htons() used?
  - From: Scott Bambrough
- Re: wrong htons() used?
  - From: Grant Edwards

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]