From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1N3BLY-0004TI-8C
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:26:04 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1N3BLV-0004Pi-Qr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:26:03 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37714 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1N3BLV-0004PN-Jv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:26:01 -0400
Received: from fe02x03-cgp.akado.ru ([77.232.31.165]:50916 helo=akado.ru)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <av1474@comtv.ru>) id 1N3BLT-0005iQ-Ef
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:26:00 -0400
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:25:52 +0300 (MSK)
From: malc <av1474@comtv.ru>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 07/10] ac97: sizeof returns unsigned long
In-Reply-To: <4AE86847.3050604@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0910281923520.2247@linmac.oyster.ru>
References: <cover.1256731509.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<e328160589068e08ae5b6700bbd96567b80cd475.1256731509.git.quintela@redhat.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0910281552510.5319@linmac.oyster.ru>
	<hc9fuh$rl3$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0910281839300.2101@linmac.oyster.ru>
	<4AE86847.3050604@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

> On 10/28/2009 04:41 PM, malc wrote:
> > > > >  >  sizeof returns size_t (%zX), so this is wrong
> > > >
> > > >  size_t is long on all practical platforms except ia64-hpux and Win64,
> > > so this
> > > >  is not more wrong than it was before.
> > Yea right, except that's it's not long on any 32bit platform, at least not
> > from gcc's -Wformat point of view.
> 
> Still an improvement (wrong code vs. warning)...  you are a committer, 
> you can fix it yourself if it bothers you...

It's wrong code vs wrong code on Win64 and a warning equals failed build
in presence of -Werror.

-- 
mailto:av1474@comtv.ru