On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 02:42:08PM +0200, Turbo Fredriksson wrote: > >>>>> "Adrian" == Adrian Bunk <bunk@fs.tum.de> writes: > As everyone know, I've been a little 'off line', and haven't had much time > to fix my packages. Now I'm back, with a new version of Roxen2 (that fixes > some of the bugs on it)... > According to the bug report 'va_arg()' isn't legitimate in C... va_arg() is, va_arg on a short isn't. > ----- s n i p ----- > Fixing that (using a temporary int/uint to hold the va_arg before > downcasting it to a short) seems to produce a binary, actually. > ----- s n i p ----- > 'seems to produce', but does it work? Is this the 'correct' fix? It's the correct fix for that problem. There may be other problems. I don't know roxen, and I don't have a powerpc to test it on. > <rant> > Anthony, If you think it's so '*really* straightforward', then why > the **** haven't you done so months ago!?!?!? I have numerous times > asked for help on this!!!!! > </rant> Why haven't I done what? NMUed your package? Because I don't have a powerpc nor do I know anything about roxen. Answered any of your requests for help? Because I haven't seen any. The bug report log for #81648 is completely empty apart from the initial report, eg. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. ``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.'' -- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Attachment:
pgpq9R4LwkPsE.pgp
Description: PGP signature