a question regarding <sys/shm.h>

[Pascal Hofstee]

Peter Jeremy wrote:
> Whilst I agree that the Linux defn is the more sensible one, System V
> IPC and common sense are not commonly found together.  Tradionally the
> definition was "int".  It appears that the definition changed from
> "int" to "size_t" in issue 5 of the Open Group base definition but
> FreeBSD has not caught up with this.
> 
> I'm not sure what plans there are to change this.  You could try
> putting together a patch to address this and submitting it as a PR
> (this means addressing all references to shm_segsz in the base
> system, not just <sys/shm.h>).

First of all, thanks for the quick response. At the very least this 
sheds some light onto the history and how this situation likely came to 
pass. I'll see if i can put together a patch during the next week or so 
that would bring our definitions regarding System V IPC in synch, i'll 
also try to see if i can find additional occurances of similar 
discrepancies so these could be fixed in a single run.

Any additional sugestions/objections are always greatly appreciated.

-- 
   Pascal Hofstee