From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-72959-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 30965 invoked by alias); 30 Aug 2016 03:12:48 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 28246 invoked by uid 89); 30 Aug 2016 03:10:07 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RED autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mailbackend.panix.com
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwNRceIGSwfvkSscw6ZbwX1IDpwzLNTmVwtFdp8mfLOTATs8A5dvXKfFZKex1tHr+3COn8uIOc7ZMJgm4g==
X-Received: by 10.28.132.16 with SMTP id g16mr1348687wmd.97.1472526594297;
 Mon, 29 Aug 2016 20:09:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1608300120400.6854@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
References: <20160830011645.25769-1-zackw@panix.com> <20160830011645.25769-2-zackw@panix.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1608300120400.6854@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
From: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 03:12:00 -0000
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAKCAbMi82QKqPRGji8RynVTLKb3KBrdK=WVQFL1udr6_XLf7DA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKCAbMi82QKqPRGji8RynVTLKb3KBrdK=WVQFL1udr6_XLf7DA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] Installed-header hygiene (BZ#20366): obsolete BSD
 u_* types.
To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-SW-Source: 2016-08/txt/msg00877.txt.bz2

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Aug 2016, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>
>>         s/\b(__)?u_?short\b/unsigned short/g;
>>         s/\b(__)?u_?long\b/unsigned long/g;
>
> Note that the glibc style prefers "unsigned short int" and "unsigned long
> int", although of course this BSD code isn't following glibc style in
> other ways.

Is that a request to change the patch or not?