[PATCH] byteorder: do not assume PowerPC is big-endian

David Disseldorp ddiss at suse.de
Tue May 6 02:54:48 MDT 2014

On Mon, 5 May 2014 14:05:07 -0700, Christof Schmitt wrote:

> On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 07:01:18PM +0200, David Disseldorp wrote:
> > My preference would still be to continue to use the lib/ccan/wscript
> > endianness checks, as they first use the __BYTE_ORDER, __BIG_ENDIAN and
> > __LITTLE_ENDIAN definitions before doing the runtime test. They also
> > fail if endianness can't be determined.
> After looking into this again, i agree that the ccan check looks better.
> It also seems that you don't need the include for the endian.h. The
> HAVE_BIG_ENDIAN is defined globally from wscript, so it is always
> available.

The include was there to act as a build assertion that the HAVE_*_ENDIAN
defines were available, but it's not required, and shouldn't be
necessary with the patch series that Andrew posted.

> Reviewed-by: Christof Schmitt <cs at samba.org>
> for your patch without the include.

Thanks for the review Christof!

Cheers, David

More information about the samba-technical mailing list