Re: [Libexif-devel] Re: Ubuntu; int16_t

[Jan P. <pa...@pi...>]

> The Ubuntu thing seems to have spawned a flurry of activity in other
> areas. Is that stable, or should I create a branch with the Ubuntu fix,
> but without all the other changes?

Absolutely stable. No need for any branching. There are no undergoing
changes that would need any stabilization.

>> May I ask you (or somebody else) to update the configure scripts to
>> generate also the definition of int16_t (signed 16 bit) in _stdint.h?
>> Thanks.
>
> You'll have to help me there:
>
>   - What should int16_t be defined as?

signed 16 bit integer (usually called short).

>   - Or where is int16_t defined on your system?

Nowhere. exif-utils.h was already using uint16_t, uint32_t
and int32_t. I just added int16_t for consistency (to typedef
ExifSShort).
I am not a *nix developer, therefore I am not much familiar with
the (auto)configuration process. However, upto my understanding, all
these types are defined in _stdint.h which is automatically generated
by the configure script.

My manually edited _stdint.h contains this:
#ifndef __STDINT_H
#define __STDINT_H

typedef unsigned char   uint8_t;
typedef unsigned short  uint16_t;
typedef signed short    int16_t;
typedef unsigned int    uint32_t;
typedef signed int      int32_t;

#endif /*!__STDINT_H*/

> As far as I can see, we're not defining any int types ourselves, but
> rather just check for them in a number of header files, and just
> #include the right one.

 -- Jan