Re: More build.sh ctf fallout on a linux host

[Chuck Zmudzinski <frchuckz%gmail.com@localhost>]

You are right - ulonglong_t is not necessary and I successfully built 
tools on Debian 8 after undoing your previous fix and replacing with 
your new patch of external/cddl/osnet/dist/uts/common/rpc/types.h.

I wonder if it is safe to remove u_longlong_t from <sys/types.h>. Linux 
does not have it, BSD does not need it. Does any modern software package 
use it?

Chuck Zmudzinski


On 06/12/2018 06:01 PM, maya%netbsd.org@localhost wrote:
> blah, oops. Given the comment I'm not sure ulonglong_t is even
> necessary, it doesn't appear anywhere.
>
> Does reverting the previous and adding this (which upstream might
> accept, they seem to just forget to remove it) help?
>
> Works for building tools under netbsd.
>
> Index: ./osnet/dist/uts/common/rpc/types.h
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvsroot/src/external/cddl/osnet/dist/uts/common/rpc/types.h,v
> retrieving revision 1.2
> diff -u -r1.2 types.h
> --- ./osnet/dist/uts/common/rpc/types.h	10 Apr 2015 22:44:20 -0000	1.2
> +++ ./osnet/dist/uts/common/rpc/types.h	12 Jun 2018 21:55:19 -0000
> @@ -49,13 +49,6 @@
>   typedef int bool_t;
>   typedef int enum_t;
>   
> -/*
> - * The ulonglong_t type was introduced to workaround an rpcgen bug
> - * that has been fixed, this next typedef will be removed in a future release.
> - * Do *NOT* use!
> - */
> -typedef u_longlong_t ulonglong_t;
> -
>   #if defined(_LP64) || defined(_I32LPx)
>   typedef	uint32_t rpcprog_t;
>   typedef	uint32_t rpcvers_t;