From owner-freebsd-current Tue May 9 16: 5:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from sendero.simon-shapiro.org (sendero.simon-shapiro.org [207.69.194.51]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8B4CF37B5D2 for ; Tue, 9 May 2000 16:05:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from shimon@simon-shapiro.org) Received: (qmail 98178 invoked from network); 9 May 2000 23:57:09 -0000 Received: from nomis.simon-shapiro.org (209.86.126.163) by sendero.simon-shapiro.org with SMTP; 9 May 2000 23:57:09 -0000 Content-Length: 588 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 09 May 2000 19:08:21 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: shimon@simon-shapiro.org Organization: Simon's Garage From: Simon Shapiro To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: One more question (different now) Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi Again, Since you were so kind to me, I will impose another one on you (the previous answers were _all_ correct! ) Given: typedef struct junk { ... } junk_t volatile junk_t trash; What I want to do is zero out trash. bzero(trash, sizeof(junk_t)); produces a warning about loss of volatility. So does: bzero((void *)&trash, sizeof(junk_t)); So, how do I make everyone happy? Oh, the struct has to be volatile. Trust me on that one. Sincerely Yours 404.664.6401 Simon Shapiro Research Fellow, Earthlink Inc. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message