Message-Id: <200006061718.UAA07955@alpha.netvision.net.il>
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 20:17:34 +0200
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.1.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5b
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com
CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <393AD180.82B5057D@bigfoot.com> (message from Richard Dawe on
	Sun, 04 Jun 2000 23:00:32 +0100)
Subject: Re: Inline asm: lcall & various binutils versions
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000601092740 DOT 17554F-100000 AT is> <3936D958 DOT 20A71094 AT bigfoot DOT com> <200006020647 DOT JAA27744 AT alpha DOT netvision DOT net DOT il> <393AD180 DOT 82B5057D AT bigfoot 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: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 23:00:32 +0100
> From: Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
> 
> I guess I'm nitpicking here. Do you think that adding
> "__attribute__((packed))" to all the structure fields is asking for
> trouble given the problems with various versions of gcc/g++?

I don't know.  __dpmi_paddr is used for more than just lcall.  In
fact, I'm guessing that most of its uses is something else.  So I
wonder how justified is this change.

Perhaps this should be discussed on djgpp-workers, for more insight
and opinions.

Anyway, you could always define your own struct, right?