On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Johnny C. Lam wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 02:24:53AM -0800, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> > I am working on PR pkg/23515.

> Your patches just add "defined(_LP64)" to the files.  If they worked
> on alpha or sparc64 already, then your change has no effect for those
> platforms.  If they didn't work on those other 64-bit platforms, then
> these changes got them working at last.  In either case, we won't need
> to bump the PKGREVISION for the tiff package since it doesn't affect
> any existing binary packages.

It does effect existing binary packages. It built fine for the originator
before. It was installed. But, libtiff't tiffinfo was broken and
windowmaker was broken (tiff icons not working).

The first patch was from the originator of the PR. (I fixed it to have
tabs though.) It worked for him.

So it does effect the existing packages of tiff for amd64 (as tested by
the PR submitter). Should I ask on the amd64 list for feedback too?

I thought the revision should be increased since how does a new install of
windowmaker (or anything else using tiff) know to use the working version
of tiff?

> Does our gcc not define __LP64__ as a preprocessor macro by default
> on 64-bit machines?  Is _LP64 in fact the correct macro to check?  We
> need to be sure before we make this change.  Perhaps double check on
> tech-toolchain?

Okay, I'll do that now.

   Jeremy C. Reed
   http://bsd.reedmedia.net/