Subject: Re: ntohl() types
To: None <tech-net@netbsd.org>
From: Simon Burge <simonb@wasabisystems.com>
List: tech-net
Date: 08/22/2001 15:54:43
Jason R Thorpe wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2001 at 02:09:25PM +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
>
> > XNET 5.2 (p92) says that ntohl() and friends should use uint32_t and
> > uint16_t (u_int32_t and u_int16_t if you favor BSD-like types).
> > NetBSD header files use in_addr_t and in_port_t. are there any
> > reasons why they should be like this?
>
> Heh, they use in_addr_t and in_port_t because that's what an older
> version of XNET said to use :-)
SUSv2 uses uint{32,16}_t as well.
> Please change them to use uint32_t and uint16_t (not u_...).
Seconded!
Simon.
--
Simon Burge <simonb@wasabisystems.com>
NetBSD CDs, Support and Service: http://www.wasabisystems.com/