Hi Mattias,
> Is the aim of this discussion still to determine which version of the
> proposed change to use? The original int version, or the updated
> ssize_t version?
I'm sorry to hear in your mail that you are feeling frustrated
("derail into a general complaint…" etc.) as our shared goal is
surely to get a good patch out as quick as possible… and if
upstream can "bless" such a change, all the better.
> So using the ssize_t version that preserves the sizes of the arguments
> and return type of the function is the safer choice, regardless of
> upstream's claim that the function is private.
Upstream have not replied so I will upload and release the ssize_t
version shortly.
Regards,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
`. `'` [email protected] 🍥 chris-lamb.co.uk
`-
