Subject: Re: type inconsistencies
To: None <>
From: Barry Books <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 03/09/1995 12:00:45
>   Yes.  Check the POSIX 1003.1 spec. for the official prototypes for
>   mmap, munmap, mprotect, etc.

>POSIX 1003.1 doesn't define any of these, and if it did, I *strongly*
>suspect it would have used size_t in the first place.  Right now,
>we're not even consistent; mmap(2) uses size_t, but the rest of them

These functions are in POSIX 1003.4. I have draft 14 and here are
the definitions:

These should be in <sys/mman.h>

void *mmap(void *addr, size_t len, int prot, int flags, int fildes, off_t off);
int munmap(void *addr, size_t len);
int mprotect(const void *addr, size_t len, int prot);
int msync(void *addr, size_t len, int flags);

If you need any others let me know and I'll look them up.

I have copies of:
X/Open XPG4
and maybe some others if I look around.


Barry Books
Coming Soon