On 10/24/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lucian Adrian Grijincu wrote: > > On 9/18/07, Lucian Adrian Grijincu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> I wonder if an APR_INO_T_FMT is needed and whether it can be added to > >> 1.2.x or 0.9.x branches. > >> > > > > For whatever reason someone might want to print an apr_ino_t. > > As I understand the versoining rules, this can't be added in neither > > 0.9 nor 1.2, but can make it in 1.3. Is there a need for such a > > #define? If yes, I'll update the updated patch Joe sent to include > > this too (only on trunk which I think is the 1.3 wannabe). > > Yes - for 1.3 this would be fine, although doesn't upcasting the apr_ino_t > to a uint64_t solve this for everyone in a really portable manner? >
Oh, yeah, you're right, there's no need to have it created at ./configure time. This should suffice: #define APR_INO_T_FMT APR_UINT64_T_FMT -- Lucian
