Quoting David Miller <da...@davemloft.net>:
I was considering making grub_size_t long and grub_ssize_t unsigned
long. I remember that it required many changes in string formats, so I
didn't feel it would be justified. But we could try it again.
You should use whatever is the appropriate size_t/ssize_t type on
the given platform+ABI, and that way GRUB could use "%Zd" and/or
"%zd" throughout. Was that the plan?
No, the plan was to use long. We don't support architectures where
long and size_t have different sizes. I'm not aware of such
architectures. I don't care about win64, as it would need some very
special handling (perhaps redefinition of long).
I was trying to fix an inconsistency of the userspace, where size_t
can be unsigned int or unsigned long. Perhaps the plan was too
ambitious.
--
Regards,
Pavel Roskin
_______________________________________________
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
