Re: NSK(OSS) compilation problem

[Matthew Woehlke]

Paul Eggert wrote:
> Matthew Woehlke <address@hidden> writes:
> > Eh? How is testing if ((1<<1)>>1) == 1 "too strict"?
>
> It's not.  But it wasn't clear from your earlier posting whether the
> failure was 1LL<<1>>1 or 1LL<<63>>63.  The latter is not required to
> yield 1 (assuming long long is 64 bits), because C doesn't define the
> semantics of right shift of a negative integer.

My apologies. I thought "all tests fail" was clear enough, but I see it 
wasn't. Sorry about that. :-)

> > btw, was I supposed to see something different from your version? It
> > is admittedly much more platform-agnostic (I wasn't trying :-)), but I
> > didn't see anything that would cause me to expect yours to give
> > different results.
>
> Good.  That's what we want.  We want a test case that fails
> reliably on your platform but should succeed reliably on any
> conforming host.

That it should. :-) Glad to help out (and again, I really appreciate all 
the support on your end as well).

> I installed the following patch into gnulib and will install
> something similar into Autoconf shortly.
> [snip patch]

Thanks again!

--
Matthew
If this message is intercepted, the sender will disavow all knowledge of 
its existence.