Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:52:06 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Pascal Hofstee <caelian@gmail.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: a question regarding <sys/shm.h> Message-ID: <20070131085206.GW892@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <45C04593.2090704@gmail.com> References: <45C04593.2090704@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] 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 #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFwFi2/opHv/APuIcRAhnsAJ9smPx1OTEMTarJX37PNoylkebjjACcCwxL 3T3EZBnnZcSiaHT3pnzyvXU= =uLxS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070131085206.GW892>