Re: size_t changes and 32/64-bit, kernel uio_resid type changed.

[Jordan Gordeev <jgordeev@xxxxxx>]

Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 9:49 PM -0700 8/18/09, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> >     size_t has been changed to unsigned long (and ssize_t to long).  I 
> > may
> >     revert this prior to the release if we hit pkgsrc problems.  The 
> > change
> >     will be kept for 64-bit machines.
> >
> >     The change on 32 bit machines seems to do a pretty good job 
> > generating
> >     compiler warnings on 32-bit machines for code that will break on
> >     64-bit machines.  Because of this I think it is worth seeing how 
> > badly
> >     pkgsrc breaks with the change.  If it breaks too much we will revert
> >     it on 32 bit machines.
>
> Isn't this explicitly wrong?  Isn't ssize_t defined as holding all
> valid values of size_t, *plus* some extra values which can be used
> for error indications?
>
> To quote SUSv3:
>
>    "The type ssize_t shall be capable of storing values at least
>     in the range [-1, {SSIZE_MAX}]"
>
> So are you defining SSIZE_MAX to be smaller than maximum-long?
You are mistaken.
ssize_t is expected to be the same size as size_t.
SSIZE_MAX in our case will equal LONG_MAX. What do you see as being 
wrong with that?