On Sun, 17 Dec 2006, Jeffrey Altman wrote: > I don't see a definition of rxi_getAllAddrMaskMtu within > src/utils/netutils.c. > > The return value is the number of addresses so it could be a uint. > You are right. I created one to eliminate compiler warnings.
I was just wondering why there are two different proto's for the same function name but use different types of ints and whether they can be combined without breaking anything and uints to -me- make the most sense, but the rx stuff might have errors coming back as negative numbers and need signed ints. Should I really be doing this on the 1.5.x source instead of the 1.4.2 source so we can fold these in? It really annoys me to see 5k warning messages when compiling source. I know some of those I won't eliminate but implicit function defs and other warnings can be fairly easily eliminated without breaking much. There are other changes related to the different libraries solaris has.. This change -could- break a few things though, thus the question.. :) -------------------------------------- Sean O'Malley, Information Technologist Michigan State University ------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
