Re: [PATCH] Detect endianness on more platforms that don't use BYTE_ORDER

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Charles Bailey <cbailey32@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> I claim that any
> platform which provides both but with differing senses is somewhat
> broken so I cannot see the precedence mattering much.

I agree with that, and that is the reason why we shouldn't change
the order all of a sudden.  If it shouldn't matter, then there is
only downside of a possiblity to break such an insane set-up that
has been happily working by accident, without helping anybody if we
change it, no?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]