On Tuesday 15 August 2006 19:22, Frank Cusack wrote:
> On August 15, 2006 7:05:45 PM +0200 Christian Iversen

wrote:
> > On Tuesday 15 August 2006 18:13, Frank Cusack wrote:
> >> Isn't long (and u_long) 32 bits on ILP32? Or is u_long really uint64_t.

> >
> > Well, it seems you're right. On gcc-linux-i386, there's absolutely no
> > difference in size between "unsigned long int" and "unsigned int".

>
> That wasn't quite my question. u_long is a typedef, it might be 64 bits.


I forgot to say that I checked the typedef of u_long. It's indeed "unsigned
long"-equivalent.

> > I didn't expect that, but then again C is not my primary language.
> >
> > What type should I use instead? Is uint64_t sufficiently portable?

>
> It is C99, so it should be the most portable, but it's always better
> to follow the existing style. There might be an openssh-specific type.
> It should take you less then 1 minute to find out.


Right, I found it. It's called u_int64_t. uint64_t is used nowhere in openssh.

I'll fix that for v2 of the patch.

Thanks for the help.

--
Regards,
Christian Iversen
_______________________________________________
openssh-unix-dev mailing list
openssh-unix-dev@mindrot.org
http://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/lis...enssh-unix-dev