From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Ec28q-0004F5-AL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 09:50:36 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Ec28k-0004Eg-2V
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 09:50:32 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ec28g-0004EX-Ic
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 09:50:27 -0500
Received: from [206.46.252.42] (helo=vms042pub.verizon.net)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Ec28g-0004c3-Nu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 09:50:26 -0500
Received: from [71.97.178.169] by vms042.mailsrvcs.net
	(Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-4.02 (built Sep  9 2005))
	with ESMTPA id <0IQ000BOX3VXLNF3@vms042.mailsrvcs.net> for
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Nov 2005 08:50:22 -0600 (CST)
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 09:50:20 -0500
From: Dave Feustel <dfeustel@verizon.net>
Message-id: <200511150950.20856.dfeustel@verizon.net>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Many syntax errors in op.h
Reply-To: dfeustel@mindspring.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

I am making progress as I modify the Qemu source code to work 
around a number of OpenBSD deficiencies. I don't yet know how
to fix the following problem which occurs about 25 times in op.h:

C statements of the form

   *(uint32_t *)(gen_code_ptr + 210) = (long)(&) + 14;

generate syntax errors (apparently because of the use of "(&)")
with the c compiler used in OpenBSD 3.7 (gcc (GCC) 3.3.5 (propolice)).

Similar statements with a symbol following the "&" (eg "(&xyz)") do not generate
syntax errors. Has this been seen before? Is there a fix?

Thanks,
Dave Feustel
-- 
Switch to Secure OpenBSD with a KDE desktop!!!
NOW with Virtual PC OS support via QEMU and
Beowulf clustering using PETSc and MPICH2!