"Albert D. Cahalan" wrote: > > Michel =?iso-8859- writes: > > Jens Schmalzing wrote: > >> Michel D\344nzer writes: > > >>> Which one would that be? BenH told me the offset text is caused by > >>> the dreaded (un)signed char issue. > >> > >> Precisely that. And therefore, it wasn't a big deal to fix. But > >> since I made a package for my personal use out of it, why not share it > >> with others. > > > > Have you fixed it properly or just with -fsigned-char? > > "properly"? > > The "signed" keyword is new, added by the same committee that > came up with trigraphs. This is all about kissing IBM's butt > for EBCDIC-encrypted text on IBM mainframes and minicomputers. > Proper UNIX systems use a signed char. PowerPC Linux gets an > unsigned char from AIX, which gets it from being done by IBM. > Ugh. The proper fix involves changing your gcc spec file.
Show me a standard which defines char as being signed and I'll happily file a bug against gcc. At least we seem to agree that -fsigned-char isn't a solution. ;) > While I'm at it, PowerPC chips can handle the correct byte order. 'Correct'? While I much prefer big endian (the only advantage of little endian seems to be for hiding bad code), I don't pretend being able to judge which one is 'correct'. If you prefer little endian, you are free to start a little endian port of the Linux kernel for PowerPC or use different OSs and/or hardware. > We bring these portability problems on ourselves. I strongly disagree. Code relying on broken assumptions is simply broken. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast
