Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
From: Mark Himsley <mark AT mdsh DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: od
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 17:34:28 +0000
Message-ID: <se257ugcv17ei4c45518knho58647std98@4ax.com>
References: <200202191403 DOT g1JE3tx09996 AT otaku DOT freeshell DOT org>
In-Reply-To: <200202191403.g1JE3tx09996@otaku.freeshell.org>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 14:03:55 GMT you wrote:

> > > Then, I run od -bcx and I get:
> > > 
> > > 110 124 124 120 012 000
> > >   H   T   T   P  \n  \0
> > > 5448 5054 000a
> >
> > That is correct in this little-endian platform, see
> > http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/l/little-endian.html
>
> I can understand what you are saying if I interpret it to mean that
> the hex storage values on my machine WindowsNT - which I assume from
> you message is a big-endian platform - are faithfully represented
> by the output from the od -bcx display.

In case you misinterpreted what I said and did not read the URL I listed,
your Intel machine is little-endian. If you don't know what a 'short' is or
do not understand the difference between a 'short' and a 'byte' or you don't
understand the difference between a big and a little endian platform is then
I suggest you do some research. 

> > >I think they should be 4854 5450 000a.
> > 
> > Only if you were on a big-endian platform.
>
>What then surprises me is that the octal representation of this
>same storage is 110 124 124 120 which is what I would expect.

Yes, because the octal and the ascii been split into the byte values
therefore they must be in the correct order. What you are looking for is a
byte sized hex representation (as opposed to the shorts which are obviously
confusing you).

>It seems to me that you are suggesting that the only correct
>representation of the hex storage values would require od to
>ouput an ascii value of THPT.

Where exactly did I say that?

>I urge you to reconsider your opinion and to modify od to 
>output 4854 5450.

If you want to modify your copy of od then do so. If you feel like it then
send a patch to the maintainer (not me). You can urge me to reconsider what
every you like but since I understand the output of od and I did not write
it your urges will have no affect on me what-so-ever.

More over, this whole discussion has no relevance that I can see to cygwin
and therefore I urge you to discuss this issue with the appropriate people
through the appropriate channels.

-- 
Mark Himsley
In Acton

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/