On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Oscar Pernas <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > I'm using apr in a process that uses CORBA TAO, for communications. My > problem is that TAO and APR has the same redefinition of a variable. > In apr.h i can see: > typedef int uid_t ; > typedef int pid_t; > typedef int gid_t; > However in TAO I could see: > typedef long uid_t > typedef long pid_t > > Im in Win32 and Win64 platform. I've commented it in apr source and library > compiles well, Could I have any problem? What would be the best solution?
I think that's the best solution for now. APR doesn't actually need to define uid_t for its own purposes. That general issue -- defining Unix types -- should be be fixed in the next major (i.e., not binary compatible) release. In cases other than uid_t there may be other fallout to handle. For example, apr_proc_t uses (requires) pid_t. According to our API compatibility rules, something equivalent to #ifndef APR_PLEASE_DONT_DEFINE_UNIX_TYPES typedef whatever uid_t #endif could be provided with apr 1.5.x. That would be worthwhile if the fix could be near-complete. (I dunno the complete fallout.)
