Graham Davies <[email protected]> wrote: > How you fix this depends on whether you care or not. If you need to > preserve the volatile treatment, you'll have to write a replacement > for memcpy.
As the code works as is (with the warning), I bet the volatile qualification wasn't needed at all in the first place, and could as well be omitted. -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
