This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Arghh ! It's the _preprocessor_ that behaves differently under glibc2.0 and glibc2.1 bootstraps of egcs-1.1.2! I was really going crazy over this, but here is a nice simple testcase: cpp-bpl.c ====================================================================== #if (~0UL) == 0xffffffffUL #error "32 Bit platform" #else #error "64 Bit platform" #endif ====================================================================== md:/home/wmglo/src/egcs-bugs% /pkg/egcs-1.1.2/bin/gcc cpp-bpl.c cpp-bpl.c:2: #error "32 Bit platform" md:/home/wmglo/src/egcs-bugs% gcc cpp-bpl.c cpp-bpl.c:4: #error "64 Bit platform" (the only difference between /pkg/egcs-1.1.2/bin/gcc and gcc is that the former has been bootstrapped against glibc2.0, the latter against glibc2.1). This is on 32bit Intel, of course. The Linux ncr53c8xx driver contains this test, but only for Linux versions before 2.2.0, which is why H.J. didn't see this bug. This compile-time test for 32bit vs. 64bit is probably broken, and the glibc-2.1-bootstrapped version of egcs-1.1.2 is actually more correct than the glibc-2.0-bootstrapped version (were the test worked), right? Regards, Wolfram. -- `Surf the sea, not double-u three...' wmglo@dent.med.uni-muenchen.de
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |