On Tue, 09 Jul 2013 22:39:40 +0200 Andreas Tobler <andreast-list_at_fgznet.ch> wrote: > On 09.07.13 22:33, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > Here's what I wrote as a reference: > > ---snip--- > > Does someone know what this is supposed to result in? > > > > I would assume as the unions are unnamed and no variable is declared > > inside the struct with it, that the size of the struct is the same > > as not having those unions inside the structs. > > > > If this is correct I would assume the correct fix would be to #if-0 > > them out. > > ---snip--- > > I did so and my kernelbuild is happy now. Yes, I do not use this > header at all. The linuxulator uses it for v4l2 compatibility. If you use skype, you use the header. The fix above is wrong (it changes the size of the structs with gcc and with clang). I will commit a fix in a few minutes. Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander _at_ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild _at_ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137Received on Wed Jul 10 2013 - 08:33:15 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:39 UTC