Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [PATCH] Fix compilation failures on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
From: Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:51:53 -0700
Jeff Morriss wrote:

Guy Harris wrote:
Jeff Morriss wrote:
Problem is that how you print 64-bit numbers varies. %llu doesn't always work
...and neither does "long long" as a data type.

(for example the Windoze buildbot is now red). Instead the PRI*64 macros should be used.
Or the G_GINT64_MODIFIER macro. I seem to remember that there was an issue a while ago where the native *printf on Windows used %I64[doxu] but the Windows GLib *printf routines used %ll[doxu], or something such as that (because it had its own formatting routine).

I remembered correctly:

	http://www.ethereal.com/lists/ethereal-dev/200509/msg00368.html

although, unfortunately, GLib 1.2[.x] has some severe breakage for 64-bit printing on Windows:

	http://www.ethereal.com/lists/ethereal-dev/200509/msg00370.html

GLib 1.2[.x] uses the native "vsnprintf()" if present and the native
"vsprintf()" (into a buffer whose size is set from
"g_printf_string_upper_bound()") otherwise.

Unfortunately, "g_printf_string_upper_bound()" does its *own*
interpretation of the format string; it understands %q[douxX],
%L[douxX], and %ll[douxX], but *NOT* %I64[douXx].

so we may be doomed to having formatting of 64-bit values not work quite right on Windows builds with GTK+ 1.2[.x].

As such, I checked in a change to check for G_GINT64_MODIFIER in the top-level configure script (as is done in the Wiretap configure script), and to use that when printing gint64/guint64 values, rather than casting to "long long" or "unsigned long long".

You mean rather than using %lld or %llu?

Yes. %ll[doux] is definitely wrong - especially given that, on LP64 platforms, gint64/guint64 might just be a long, not a long long.

Should the PRI*64 macros (which I just recently started adding--meaning there were some there before, it's just that only recently did /I/ add some) be replaced with G_GINT64_MODIFIER?

Yes (except for calls that use printf/fprintf/sprintf/snprintf rather than the GLib equivalents, if any; there should be as few of those as possible). We should also update the documentation.