Fix some type definitions for the WORDS_BIGENDIAN case

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

"Alexandre Julliard" <julliard at winehq.org> wrote:

> Well, I'm not sure what Microsoft is trying to achieve here either...
> 
> It doesn't seem a very good idea to put a standard PE signature on
> big-endian files, since they are not valid PE files. The current
> approach makes it possible at some point to support loading
> little-endian PE files on big-endian machines (which I suspect is what
> Microsoft is trying to do with that define). If you swap the signature
> in builtins then you will have no way of knowing whether you need to
> swap the rest of the header.

Isn't Machine (IMAGE_FILE_MACHINE_xxx) field supposed to indicate that?

-- 
Dmitry.