Yar Tikhiy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Excuse me, but did you notice that fts(3) is not a part of sys? It's > generic userland code, albeit it's contaminated by system-dependent > parts for performance or whatever.
Irrelevant. > But let intN_t be mostly confined in the kernel and system-dependent > userland code. E.g., system-dependent include files can use them > to define more portable types such as ino_t, nlink_t, or whatever. C99 doesn't define those either. > Userland code should be portable and useful to other systems in the > chosen domain of compatibility, e.g., C99 or POSIX, unless there > are substantial reasons for it not to. That's how different projects > can benefit from each other's work. Both C99 and POSIX *require* int64_t and uint64_t on all platforms that have 64-bit integer types. FreeBSD has never run on any platform that doesn't. I don't think NetBSD or OpenBSD has either, nor Solaris, nor Linux to my knowledge. DES -- Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
