Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:52:06 +1100
On Wed, 2007-Jan-31 08:30:27 +0100, Pascal Hofstee wrote:
In a recent attempt in trying to clean up some compiler warnings in a
GNUstep related project i came upon a case where the FreeBSD datatypes
seemed to disagree with the Linux ones. Though this in itself is not
unusual i do wonder if in this case the Linux definition isn't the more
proper one.
The definition in question is inside <sys/shm.h> and involves
struct shmid_ds.shm_segsz which seems to be defined as "int" whereas
Linux defines this as "size_t".
Whilst I agree that the Linux defn is the more sensible one, System V
IPC and common sense are not commonly found together. Tradionally the
definition was "int". It appears that the definition changed from
"int" to "size_t" in issue 5 of the Open Group base definition but
FreeBSD has not caught up with this.
I'm not sure what plans there are to change this. You could try
putting together a patch to address this and submitting it as a PR
(this means addressing all references to shm_segsz in the base
system, not just <sys/shm.h>).
--
Peter Jeremy
Attachment:
pgpQFLNbxZbcp.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- From: Pascal Hofstee
- Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- References:
- a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- From: Pascal Hofstee
- a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- Prev by Date: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- Next by Date: Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- Previous by thread: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- Next by thread: Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
