Kai Tietz <ktiet...@googlemail.com> writes:
> Yes, this is a valid point. The (u)int??_t types aren't necessarily
> declared by including sys/types.h. So what's about the following
> patch. If stdint.h header is present, then we should include it and
> then we can assume that the (u)int??_t types are present.
This is wrong: <stdint.h> provides e.g. uint32_t, but not u_int32_t.
The latter is a BSDism.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
