On Tue, 4 Feb 2025, Hal Murray wrote:
As Alice would say, "curiouser and curiouser". Just when I think I've
figured out the reason for one bit of bizarreness, you find another. :-)
I think the current code works on all my systems.
What's the breakdown in the 32-bit NetBSD case? One wou
Yo Hal!
On Tue, 04 Feb 2025 17:32:31 -0800
Hal Murray via devel wrote:
> > As Alice would say, "curiouser and curiouser". Just when I think
> > I've figured out the reason for one bit of bizarreness, you find
> > another. :-)
>
> I think the current code works on all my systems.
That's a s
> As Alice would say, "curiouser and curiouser". Just when I think I've
> figured out the reason for one bit of bizarreness, you find another. :-)
I think the current code works on all my systems.
> What's the breakdown in the 32-bit NetBSD case? One would hope that the
> payload is 64+32 a
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025, Hal Murray via devel wrote:
Linux:
x86-64:16
I don't have any really really old systems.
x86-32: 8
Debien, 6.1.0-29-686-pae i686
Arm: 8
Arm64: 16
FreeBSD:
x86-64: 20 <===
x86-32: 8
Arm: 16
Arm64: 20 <===
NetBSD:
x86-64: 20 <===
x86-32: 12
Arm: 20 <
Linux:
x86-64:16
I don't have any really really old systems.
x86-32: 8
Debien, 6.1.0-29-686-pae i686
Arm: 8
Arm64: 16
FreeBSD:
x86-64: 20 <===
x86-32: 8
Arm: 16
Arm64: 20 <===
NetBSD:
x86-64: 20 <===
x86-32: 12
Arm: 20 <===
long is 4, time_t is 8, timesp
