Citerar Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/asm-i386/types.h b/include/asm-i386/types.h
> > index 4b4b295..841792b 100644
> > --- a/include/asm-i386/types.h
> > +++ b/include/asm-i386/types.h
> > @@ -1,6 +1,13 @@
> > #ifndef _I386_TYPES_H
> > #define _I386_TYPES_H
> >
> > +#if defined(__GNUC__)
> > +typedef _Bool bool;
> > +#else
> > +#warning You compiler doesn't seem to support boolean types, will set
> 'bool' as
> > an 'unsigned int'
> > +typedef unsigned int bool;
> > +#endif
> > +
> > #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> >
> > typedef unsigned short umode_t;
>
> Just delete the #ifdef and assume its either gcc, or a compatible
> compiler. That's what we assume with other data types.
You are right. Will remove it.
Just remembered one of reasons I had version-check before, how about linux 2.4?
What I understand, they have the same drivers as 2.6 but they have not commited
to use gcc >= 3. Can anyone confirm or deny this? Otherwise the discussion about
alternetiv bool-type is off no relevence anymore.
>
>
> > @@ -10,6 +17,8 @@ typedef unsigned short umode_t;
> > * header files exported to user space
> > */
> >
> > +typedef bool __u1;
> > +
> > typedef __signed__ char __s8;
> > typedef unsigned char __u8;
> >
> > @@ -36,6 +45,8 @@ #define BITS_PER_LONG 32
> > #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> >
> >
> > +typedef bool u1;
> > +
> > typedef signed char s8;
> > typedef unsigned char u8;
> >
>
> I wouldn't bother with these types. Nobody uses creates in their own
> hand-crafted bool uses, so I don't think people would suddenly start.
Removed
/Richard
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
