Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 05:05:58 +1100
On Wed, 2007-Jan-31 10:52:02 +0000, Robert Watson wrote:
If we do decide to go ahead with the ABI change, there are a number of
other things that should be done simultaneously, such as changing the uid
and gid fields to uid_t and gid_t.
And mode to mode_t. The uid and gid fields in struct shmid_ds have
already been converted, though the ones in struct ipc_perm are
obsolete. At a quick glance, everything else is up to date.
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/ is a useful reference
in this area.
--
Peter Jeremy
Attachment:
pgpRwPmNEWkls.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- References:
- a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- From: Pascal Hofstee
- Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- From: Peter Jeremy
- Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- From: Pascal Hofstee
- Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- From: Dag-Erling Smørgrav
- Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- From: Robert Watson
- a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- Prev by Date: Re: top delay value
- Next by Date: Re: top delay value
- Previous by thread: Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h>
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|