reopen 337820 severity 337820 important user debian-release@lists.debian.org usertag 337820 rc-s390 thanks
On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 03:19:01PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 07:50:20PM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote: > > > * Apply Steve Langasek's suggestion to fix the build failures on 64-bit > > > machines by explicitly adding a uint64_t variant of > > > XmlFileWriter::element. (Closes: #337820) > > This will not fix this bug. s390 have size_t == signed int. > Hrm, that doesn't make any sense. The previous set of implementations were > void element(const std::string &name, const std::string > &value); > void element(const std::string &name, const char > *value); > void element(const std::string &name, int > value); > void element(const std::string &name, unsigned int > value); > void element(const std::string &name, bool > value); > If size_t == signed int, why did the third of these not match automatically? > Where's the ambiguity? Ok, on IRC I was told that size_t is unsigned long on s390, rather than signed (or unsigned) int. sizeof(long) == sizeof(int) on s390, but long != int in C++, hence the ambiguity. And conveniently, unsigned long is the same thing as uint64_t on our 64-bit archs, so just using unsigned long instead of uint64_t should work everywhere, I think? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
