On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 12:56:43AM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote: > 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).
Maybe Christian can shred some light on this ;-) -- Robert Millan The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all." _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
