On Sat, Nov 04, 2000 at 12:14:15AM +0100, Gregor Hoffleit wrote: > FYI: This misdefinition with LONG_BIT was due to a bug in glibc's limits.h. It > has been fixed in glibc 2.96. Do you mean gcc 2.96, or glibc 2.(1|2).96 ? Or is 2.96 some internal versioning for glibc that I was unaware of ? :) -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4