apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Reser <...@reser.org>
Subject Re: Solving the off_t problem in APR 1.0
Date Tue, 03 Feb 2004 01:19:09 GMT
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 04:45:26PM -0800, Ben Reser wrote:
> So I guess I'll look into redoing it to use int, long or long long
> instead.

I found some time to look at this.  The types I'm using now match the
formats we were using before.  So we shouldn't have an ABI conflict.  If
we do we had a bug with the formats already.

The one case where this may exist would be 64-bit archs with 64-bit
off_t's.  These platforms could use long long or long for the off_t.
They might choose differently than we have for apr_int64_t.  I don't
know of any other way to deal with this than what was already done with
the LFS platforms that use long for off_t.  We'll simply have to detect
these platforms one by one and apply exceptions for them.

-- 
Ben Reser <ben@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org

"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken

Mime
View raw message