| To: | "Zajerko-McKee, Nick" <nmckee@telogy.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: your mail |
| From: | Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org> |
| Date: | Sat, 26 Oct 2002 16:08:05 -0400 |
| Cc: | "'linux-mips@linux-mips.org'" <linux-mips@linux-mips.org> |
| In-reply-to: | <37A3C2F21006D611995100B0D0F9B73CBFE312@tnint11.telogy.design.ti.com> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <37A3C2F21006D611995100B0D0F9B73CBFE312@tnint11.telogy.design.ti.com> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.1i |
On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 03:48:27PM -0400, Zajerko-McKee, Nick wrote: > Hi, > > I'm porting some code from x86 to mips(32) and noticed that in > include/asm-mips/siginfo.h differs from include/asm-i386/siginfo.h in the > order of elements of the sigchld structure. Was this an oversight or a > design decision? I would think that it would be desirable to be almost the > same as the x86 for userland ease of portability... It's probably for compatibility with that other MIPS operating system - IRIX. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [no subject], Zajerko-McKee, Nick |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: your mail, Greg Lindahl |
| Previous by Thread: | [no subject], Zajerko-McKee, Nick |
| Next by Thread: | Re: your mail, Greg Lindahl |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |