Return-Path: <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>
Received: from inas020.isp.belgacom.be (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by inav004.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-IN-AV-3.00) with ESMTP id j88LGPJh024520
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Thu, 8 Sep 2005 23:16:25 +0200
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>)
Received: from inmx015.isp.belgacom.be (inmx015.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.2.218])
        by inas020.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-IN-AS-2.03) with ESMTP id j88LGO57020786
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Thu, 8 Sep 2005 23:16:25 +0200
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>)
Received: from duke.maptools.org (r153.dmsolutions.ca [209.217.116.153] (may be forged))
        by inmx015.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-IN-2.32) with ESMTP id j88LGI8f029363
        for <joris.at.lebbeke@skynet.be>; Thu, 8 Sep 2005 23:16:19 +0200
        (envelope-from <tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org>)
Received: from duke.maptools.org (duke.maptools.org [127.0.0.1])
	by duke.maptools.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j88LCF1X013445;
	Thu, 8 Sep 2005 17:12:17 -0400
Received: from mta10.adelphia.net (mta10.adelphia.net [68.168.78.202])
	by duke.maptools.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j88Kcs8J012035
	for <tiff@lists.maptools.org>; Thu, 8 Sep 2005 16:38:55 -0400
Received: from [192.168.0.12] (really [69.168.32.135]) by mta10.adelphia.net
	(InterMail vM.6.01.04.01 201-2131-118-101-20041129) with ESMTP
	id <20050908203853.NEY12165.mta10.adelphia.net@[192.168.0.12]>;
	Thu, 8 Sep 2005 16:38:53 -0400
Message-ID: <4320A16D.7010802@adelphia.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 16:39:09 -0400
From: Dan Smith <dan.everest@adelphia.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Macintosh/20050716)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us>
Subject: Re: [Tiff] problem using 64-bit libtiff.so on Solaris 8 using GCC
References: <431C6C86.9000700@adelphia.net>
	<Pine.SOC.4.60.0509081048430.13765@blade.simplesystems.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOC.4.60.0509081048430.13765@blade.simplesystems.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 17:11:58 -0400
Cc: tiff@lists.maptools.org
X-BeenThere: tiff@lists.maptools.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
List-Id: TIFF and libtiff discussion <tiff.lists.maptools.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/private/tiff>
List-Post: <mailto:tiff@lists.maptools.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff>,
	<mailto:tiff-request@lists.maptools.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
Errors-To: tiff-bounces@lists.maptools.org
X-UIDL: 000000000023ceae.00000bce
X-MSP-STORE: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 23:16:35 +0200
Status:   

I figured out what the problem is, but where blame lies I have no idea:
    The #if defined(...) in tiff.h (v3.5.7) has checks for __LP64__, 
which, according to GCC v3.3 manual, is what they define for 64-bit.
    A quick test program shows they do NOT define __LP64__, but rather 
__LP64.  GCC v3.4.2 DOES define __LP64__ as the manual indicates.

After supplying the command line argument -D__LP64__, libtiff works fine.

    I will let the creators argue whether libtiff should have had __LP64 
listed or GCC should have defined what they advertised.

Thanks
Dan

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:

> On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Dan Smith wrote:
>
>>   I am using gcc v3.3.3, Solaris 8 & libtiff v3.5.7.  I realize 3.7.3 
>> is the latest, but upgrading to the latest libraries a few weeks 
>> before a release is not advisable unless absolutely necessary.  
>> Besides, I can't beleive I am the only one to try libtiff in 64-bit 
>> mode on GNU.
>
>
> I use libtiff 3.7.3 compiled as 64-bits under Solaris 9 using GCC 
> 4.0.1.  There are some warnings during compilation, but the library 
> seems to work correctly anyway.
>
> I don't recommend that anyone use libtiff v3.5.7 if they have the 
> option to use 3.7.3 since 3.7.3 is more portable, more modern, and 
> fixes many bugs.
>
> Bob
> ======================================
> Bob Friesenhahn
> bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us, 
> http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
> GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
> _______________________________________________
> Tiff mailing list: Tiff@lists.maptools.org
> http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff
> http://www.remotesensing.org/libtiff/
>
_______________________________________________
Tiff mailing list: Tiff@lists.maptools.org
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff
http://www.remotesensing.org/libtiff/
