[issue4728] Endianness and universal builds problems

Ronald Oussoren added the comment: On 28 Dec, 2008, at 16:38, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > > Benjamin Peterson added the comment: > > I applied the patch for #4060 in r67982. I've backported that to 2.6-maint in r67987. > > > I would still like to know what difference an Intel machine makes in

[issue4728] Endianness and universal builds problems

Benjamin Peterson added the comment: I applied the patch for #4060 in r67982. I would still like to know what difference an Intel machine makes in the installers, though. -- resolution: -> fixed status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker

[issue4728] Endianness and universal builds problems

Martin v. Löwis added the comment: > Yes, I made the build on a PPC machine. Hmm. Ronald's instructions say that the build machine must be x86 for the build to work. I don't know what other consequences using PPC would have; I recommend that we follow these instructions until we understand the

[issue4728] Endianness and universal builds problems

Benjamin Peterson added the comment: Yes, I made the build on a PPC machine. I'm no expert on this, but maybe we should just get rid of the configure check and use the __LITTLE_ENDIAN__ and __BIG_ENDIAN__ macros. ___ Python tracker

[issue4728] Endianness and universal builds problems

Martin v. Löwis added the comment: This is related to issue4060. Ronald, what is the status of that? The only reason why BIGENDIAN could be defined in the official binaries is that the build was created on a PPC system. Benjamin, is that the case? -- nosy: +benjamin.peterson, loewis, r

[issue4728] Endianness and universal builds problems

New submission from Cournapeau David : I had some problems with python and universal builds related to the WORDS_BIGENDIAN macro. Because universal builds are built in one pass (one configure), the AC_C_ENDIAN cannot be used reliably. Example: int main() { #ifdef WORDS_BIGENDIAN printf("Big