X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 20:13:37 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org)" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: bad pragma in dir.h? (and our structrure packing)
In-reply-to: <CAA2C=vCgLHdH3BJxastGzUsJzhiRddytiYwB1MP_aaiiVpC4nA@mail.gmail.com>
X-012-Sender: halo1 AT inter DOT net DOT il
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-id: <83k2wcjt8e.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <CAA2C=vCgLHdH3BJxastGzUsJzhiRddytiYwB1MP_aaiiVpC4nA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 18:29:39 +0300
> From: "Ozkan Sezer (sezeroz AT gmail DOT com)" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
> 
> In dir.h, structs ffblk and ffblklfn are surrounded by #pragma pack(1)
> and #pragma pack(4), obviously with purpose of having those two structs
> at byte packing.  But the restoration of the original packing by that
> #pragma pack(4) seems wrong: do we not need a #pragma pack() in there,
> or am I missing something?

Wasn't that already fixed in the past?  I have vague recollections of
having discussed that long ago, o maybe look in the archives (of this
list or or djgpp-workers).

> While I was there, I also noticed that for structure packing in coff.h,
> dir.h and dos.h we are marking every member with __attribute__((packed)
> instead of giving the attribute to the stucture itself. What is the
> reason for it?

See the DJGPP FAQ (node "Struct size"): it tells that the GNU C++
compiler doesn't allow having that attribute on the entire struct.
Perhaps that's changed nowadays, I don't know.  (Btw, which compiler
versions should be supported by djdev205?  That is, which versions of
GCC are supported to compile the library?)