| To: | greg@xtp.engr.sgi.com (Greg Chesson) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: A question about architecture and byte order with RPMs |
| From: | alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox) |
| Date: | Thu, 4 Dec 1997 18:56:05 +0000 (GMT) |
| Cc: | adevries@engsoc.carleton.ca, ralf@uni-koblenz.de, linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com, rpm-list@redhat.com |
| In-reply-to: | <9712040917.ZM8768@xtp.engr.sgi.com> from "Greg Chesson" at Dec 4, 97 09:17:39 am |
| Sender: | owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com |
> be added to type declarations. The modifier would indicate whether the > data object is stored in big-endian or little-endian format. > The compiler would generate byte swizzles or not, depending on whether > the native execution mode agrees with the indicated storage class. > > Perhaps the GCC world, being somewhat more enlightened, could do something > in this area (or perhaps already is thinking about it?). Yeuch ;). Can't you get your guys to put that in the MMU so you can have a little endian or big endian page ? I can see how you'd make lcc generate such output but not offhand gcc |
| Previous by Date: | Re: A question about architecture and byte order with RPMs, Ron G. Minnich |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Linux on the O2, Alan Cox |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: A question about architecture and byte order with RPMs, Ron G. Minnich |
| Next by Thread: | Re: A question about architecture and byte order with RPMs, Greg Chesson |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |