From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ken Raeburn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs for powerpc64 Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:28:01 -0400 Message-ID: <23120dfee76c16c34b48366a05750860@raeburn.org> References: <87u0lx8yii.fsf@marant.org> <878y398kdn.fsf@marant.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1114316670 11815 80.91.229.2 (24 Apr 2005 04:24:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 04:24:30 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andreas Schwab , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 24 06:24:27 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DPYfQ-0005uy-8h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 06:24:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DPYkf-0002gM-IB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:29:49 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DPYkT-0002gG-Mt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:29:37 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DPYkT-0002fs-3k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:29:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DPYkT-0002bm-1R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:29:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [207.172.4.63] (helo=smtp04.mrf.mail.rcn.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DPYlw-0007UI-RX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:31:09 -0400 Original-Received: from 65-78-24-4.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com (HELO raeburn.org) (65.78.24.4) by smtp04.mrf.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 24 Apr 2005 00:28:04 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="3.92,126,1112587200"; d="scan'208"; a="25935302:sNHT21120404" Original-Received: from [18.101.0.226] (laptop.raeburn.org [18.101.0.226]) by raeburn.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j3O4S24c025680; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:28:02 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <878y398kdn.fsf@marant.org> Original-To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=E9r=F4me_Marant?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:36318 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:36318 On Apr 23, 2005, at 13:37, J=E9r=F4me Marant wrote: > Hmm, one question though: why isn't it necessary to redefine constants > like BITS_PER_LONG, BITS_PER_EMACS_INT, EMACS_INT and so on, as done = in > the (for instance) AMD64 port file? I don't think it's actually needed in the AMD64 port either. The way=20 these get defined should work properly on any 64-bit system that=20 defines _LP64. Somewhere I've got a source tree (from before I got hosed with work and=20= stopped being able to contribute) where one of my few pending patches=20 was the deletion of some of these symbols from the AMD support, like I=20= did for the Alpha in, oh, wow, was it back in 2002? But I didn't get=20 to test out or check in the AMD changes... Maybe soon, now that I've=20 got access to an AMD x86_64 system, and some amount of spare time, I=20 can fix that, and contribute a little more as well. Ken=