Subject: Re: fortune makefiles incorrect ?
To: Simon Burge <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <email@example.com>
Date: 09/06/1999 23:49:24
Simon Burge <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Ok, back to my example of endian support - if we have something in
> nice portable ANSI C, does this alleviate the need for things like the
> endian-specific macros in <sys/endian.h> - or should they stay because
> they're a nice clean interface to do what we want to do?
They should stay, but they're irrelevant for code to be used on
cross-compile hosts (even if those happen to be NetBSD hosts 8-).
they provide a clean, potentially optimized, mechanism for
NetBSD-specific code to use.
code being used on cross-compile hosts should be clean in the sense of
being compliant with ANSI C, but shouldn't have a gigantic need for
> On a similar
> note, is it worthwhile or pointless to do something like:
> #if (defined(__unix__) || defined(unix)) && !defined(USG)
> # include <sys/param.h>
> #if defined(__NetBSD_Version__) && (__NetBSD_Version__ > something)
> # include <sys/endian.h>
> # define HTOBE64(foo) ....
> in tools that are run on the compiling host?
I'd just punt and use a portable implementation. who knows, maybe the
happy macro implementation is broken on a certain version of NetBSD?
(if standard C features are broken, well, what can you really assume?
Chris Demetriou - email@example.com - http://www.netbsd.org/People/Pages/cgd.html
Disclaimer: Not speaking for NetBSD, just expressing my own opinion.