On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 8:35 PM, Ted Unangst <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 22:54, James Turner wrote: > > I've come across a piece of software that defines __POSIX_C_SOURCE which > > causes __BSD_VISIBLE to bet set to 0. > > > > In sys/socket.h if __BSD_VISIBLE is 0 sys/_types.h is included instead > > of sys/types.h. This is fine however in three cases we reference > > u_int8_t (2) and u_int64_t (1) which requires sys/types.h. > > > > If we change these to __uint8_t and __uint64_t they work with either > > types.h or _types.h. Does this make sense? Will there be any side > > effects? > > I believe the correct type would be uint8_t or uint64_t. Those should be > visible (I think). A quick look indicates that maybe they aren't, so that > won't work. > > There won't be any side effects from using __uint64_t, but I think of it > more like a building block for another type. Not to be used directly. > Disagree. Indeed, I just committed James's diff (plus one additional change to CMSG_DATA()). (Thanks, James!) Philip Guenther
