Add platform support for m68k #40
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…ALIGN On m68k, 'long long' is 16-bit aligned while 'sem_t' is 32-bit aligned and we must therefore include 'sem_t' when determining the values for FB_ALIGNMENT and FB_DOUBLE_ALIGN. Otherwise, the futex system call will fail on these systems.
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hello!
As discussed in #39, here's my patch for adding Linux/m68k support for the B3_0_Release branch.
One thing I'm a bit unsure about is the fact that I have defined isc_info_db_impl_linux_m68k in the 2.5 branch as 86 while it's now 87 in the 3.0 and master branch since these had support added for ppc64 which took the 86. Will this create any problems except that maybe databases created on Linux/m68k Firebird 2.5 would not work on Linux/m68k Firebird 3.0 - which we wouldn't care about really.
Thanks,
Adrian