On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 09:49:55 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> I'm wondering whether it might not be safer to define these
DS> typedefs ourselves...
Blech. But you are probably right. Do we define them in the source, or in a
header somewhere? I'd say in the source, to discourage their use elsewhere in
the cod
On Thu, 2005-06-23 at 09:49 +0100, Dave Shield wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 17:47, Robert Story wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:27:13 +0100 Dave wrote:
>
> > DS> is needed for RH9, and should be safe enough under Fedora.
> > DS> But it doesn't feel quite right, somehow
> >
> > On YellowD
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 17:47, Robert Story wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:27:13 +0100 Dave wrote:
> DS> is needed for RH9, and should be safe enough under Fedora.
> DS> But it doesn't feel quite right, somehow
>
> On YellowDog (Fedora-ish ppc clone), that gets me __u8, but not u8.
Same on F
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 17:27:13 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> > The file pci.h isn't actually needed, except for it's typedefs of
DS> > u8, u16 and u32.
DS>
DS> Is there any reason for using these type names rather than
DS> 'u_int8_t', etc?
DS> I thought those were the "standard" typedefs for fixed-size vari
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 17:08, Robert Story wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:29:17 +0100 Dave wrote:
> DS> In file included from if-mib/data_access/interface_linux.c:27:
> DS> /usr/include/pci/pci.h:29: parse error before "byte"
> DS> /usr/include/pci/pci.h:30: parse error before "u8"
> DS>
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 16:29:17 +0100 Dave wrote:
DS> In file included from if-mib/data_access/interface_linux.c:27:
DS> /usr/include/pci/pci.h:29: parse error before "byte"
DS> /usr/include/pci/pci.h:30: parse error before "u8"
DS>
DS>
DS> If I comment out the four blocks of code protect
Robert,
I'm currently running into some strange compilation
problems relating to the recent set of changes to
if-mib/data_access/interface_linux.c
Things seem to work OK on a Fedora2-based system, but on
my RedHat 9 box, it fails with:
In file included from if-mib/data_access/interface_
