On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 11:32:32 -0400 Alex Burger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mitsuru Chinen wrote: > >> Mitsuru Chinen wrote: > > But I reviewed the code, I'm getting to think it's better to > > prepare both case than to replace long long to uint64_t. > > And at the snmplib/snmp_client.c, I think it's better to prepare > > code for both unsigned long long and uintmax_t. > > > > According to the preprocess of include/net-snmp/types.h, there is a > > case where the bit range of int64_t is not 64. In such case, int64_t > > is defined as long type and _INT64_IS_NOT_64BIT is defined. > >>From C99 standard, long long type is wider or equal to long type. > > To be on a safe side, I think it's better to define intmax_t > > as long long type if it's available. > > Thanks for the patch! I tried it on Windows and it compiles fine. Is > everyone else ok with the patch? Thank you very much for testing my patch! I've submitted the patch to patch manager. http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1746273&group_id=12694&atid=312694 Best Regards, ---- Mitsuru Chinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
