> Didn't this also arise in 3.13 for the host support for Digital
> Unix?
Both R3.13 and R3.12 CA client libraries ran on the alpha, and possibly
also R3.11. I think that Mark Anderson was the original person that was
asking for this.
Jeff
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marty Kraimer [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 9:12 AM
> To: Andrew Johnson
> Cc: Jeff Hill - LANL; Janet Anderson; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: RISC_pad in dbr_time_double
>
> I have a feeling that this is only the beginning of problems
> related to
> supporting 64 bit architectures.
>
> Isn't there a compiler switch that says to generate 32 bit mode?
>
> Didn't this also arise in 3.13 for the host support for Digital
> Unix?
>
> Marty
>
> Andrew Johnson wrote:
> > I received this bug report this morning from a Digital Unix
> user testing
> > R3.14.0beta2. I've replied to him about the bug tracker
> stuff, but I'll
> > leave the RISC_pad issue to Jeff and/or Marty to fix. I'm
> not convinced
> > that we should be using dbr_long_t but it might be right.
- References:
- Re: RISC_pad in dbr_time_double Marty Kraimer
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: RISC_pad in dbr_time_double Andrew Johnson
- Next:
RE: RISC_pad in dbr_time_double Jeff Hill
- Index:
<2002>
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: RISC_pad in dbr_time_double Marty Kraimer
- Next:
RE: RISC_pad in dbr_time_double Jeff Hill
- Index:
<2002>
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|