From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] GIT 1.6.1 Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2008 02:13:46 -0800 Message-ID: <7v3agca7fp.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7v7i5odams.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20081225100033.GA8451@b2j> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: bill lam X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 25 11:15:38 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LFnFe-0006Ro-Re for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 25 Dec 2008 11:15:35 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751777AbYLYKNy (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Dec 2008 05:13:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751772AbYLYKNy (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Dec 2008 05:13:54 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:58823 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751759AbYLYKNx (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Dec 2008 05:13:53 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 578DE1B0B0; Thu, 25 Dec 2008 05:13:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 201AD1B0AF; Thu, 25 Dec 2008 05:13:47 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20081225100033.GA8451@b2j> (bill lam's message of "Thu, 25 Dec 2008 18:00:33 +0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BA365BCC-D26C-11DD-9204-F83E113D384A-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: bill lam writes: > On ubuntu64 8.10, the NO_UINTMAX_T seems cause some trouble, I have to > comment out the block (in the Makefile), > > fdef NO_UINTMAX_T > BASIC_CFLAGS += -Duintmax_t=uint32_t > ndif > > to make a successful compilation. Does it happen to me only? Nobody reported it since that was added about a month and half ago. Why are you building with NO_UINTMAX_T to begin with? Isn't ubuntu 8.10 a recent enough platform that ships with modern enough header files that define ANSI uintmax_t type?