Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 01:36:55 +0100 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: human-readable swap partition sizes with pstat -sh Message-ID: <20050107003655.GC784@darkness.comp.waw.pl> In-Reply-To: <20050106225857.GB784@darkness.comp.waw.pl> References: <20050106191201.GA30826@gothmog.gr> <20050106195719.GB24896@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <20050106225857.GB784@darkness.comp.waw.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--qN286NIOm1dtEdh0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:58:57PM +0100, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: +> On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:57:19AM -0800, Brooks Davis wrote: +> +> I'd argue that we might want to replace the int64_t in humanize_number +> +> with intmax_t since that wouldn't change the ABI (or API due to impli= cit +> +> casts), but would mean we wouldn't have to add a humanize_number128 +> +> later if some architecture grows 128-bit ints for some reason or +> +> another. +>=20 +> I like intmax_t also much better than int64_t, but I took it from NetBSD +> and they got int64_t there. Anyway, I think we don't have to be 100% +> compatible here and I'll look what can be done. Here is proposed patch: http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/humanize_number.patch There is one issue... I had to add '#include <stdint.h>' to libutil.h. --=20 Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl pjd@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! --qN286NIOm1dtEdh0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFB3dmnForvXbEpPzQRAqN8AKDUyZ+WV87D7AtZJkCWuJQ+BqsRoQCg7eKl 8JYtsnkRzzxuFoDV16znkrk= =eM2k -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qN286NIOm1dtEdh0--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050107003655.GC784>