From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SkZd7-0003l8-4I for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:44:53 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q5TBXw3Z001791; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 12:33:58 +0100 Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 31331-08; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 12:33:53 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q5TBXlRZ001785 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 29 Jun 2012 12:33:48 +0100 Message-ID: <1340969629.23146.144.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 12:33:49 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1515296.CLmyHfUsyt@helios> References: <1fb664d76463830cf80997e2e13891adfff7a6eb.1340908084.git.paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com> <4FED1743.4050203@gmail.com> <1515296.CLmyHfUsyt@helios> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] apr: fix incorrect size of pid_t X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 11:44:53 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 11:50 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Thursday 28 June 2012 19:47:31 Khem Raj wrote: > > I think this may not be correct thing for 64bit targets. You are > > better of adding this to appropriate site files. > > pid_t is apparently always an int on Linux and our siteinfo files state that > ac_cv_sizeof_int is 4 for every target. Nevertheless, if we see the need to > define ac_cv_sizeof_int even though the value isn't currently different > anywhere, it seems at least consistent to set ac_cv_sizeof_pid_t there as > well. > > However, I can't help feeling that these files are a bit of a mess and it's not > totally clear to me where I should be putting this value. Should it go in > common-linux? Or do I have to add it to the specific site file for every arch? common-linux sounds like the right place to me. Cheers, Richard