Re: 3.1.52 fails to build in hppa/linux

[Rafael Laboissiere]

* Rafael Laboissiere <address@hidden> [2009-02-22 20:28]:

> * John W. Eaton <address@hidden> [2009-02-22 13:34]:
> 
> > On 22-Feb-2009, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> > 
> > | * Jaroslav Hajek <address@hidden> [2009-02-22 18:55]:
> > | 
> > | > I don't say it's impossible, but I do not see how it can actually be
> > | > possible, unless int64_t is a typedef of double (which would really be
> > | > weird).
> > | 
> > | Not even that causes a compilation error on my amd64 Debian system.
> > 
> > How is int64_t defined on the systems where the failure happens?
> 
> Tell me how I can discover that, please, and I will do it on the failing
> architectures.

It is actually simple: I just ran cpp on a file containing "#include
<stdint.h>".  Here are the results:

On amd64 ("good" architecture):

    typedef long int int64_t;
    typedef unsigned long int uint64_t;
    
On mipsel ("bad" architecture):

    typedef long long int int64_t;
    typedef unsigned long long int uint64_t;

-- 
Rafael