Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 13:51:19 -0700 From: David Schultz <dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: rittle@latour.rsch.comm.mot.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Lack of real long double support Message-ID: <20021026205119.GA5889@HAL9000.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <20021025.010541.74072638.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20021023123653.A39814@espresso.q9media.com> <200210240833.g9O8XB1W033884@latour.rsch.comm.mot.com> <20021025.004342.06455314.imp@bsdimp.com> <20021025.010541.74072638.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thus spake M. Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>: > : No. You should assume that for i386, at least, that long double will > : have the right LDBL_ constants. I've had them in my local tree for > : about 3 months now and just haven't found the time to commit to > : -current. I'll find the time right now. > > I've committed the fix to the tree. NetBSD uses these numbers, and > I've been using these numbers on a large number of systems that we > maintain at timing solutions (they were added to our local tree prior > to the 4.5 release, and we've built hundreds of ports since then w/o > any issues). I've had them in my own personal p4 tree for 3 months > with similar results. I submitted patches for this back in May. Could you please close i386/38288? While you're at it, you should probably patch IA64 as well. Other supported platforms should be okay, I think. TIA. (Every time this happens, someone comes along a month later and tells me that _I'm_wrong_ about there ever being a bug.) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021026205119.GA5889>