Re: [PATCH 2/6] strict compilers expect the number of bytes to be a size_t for bcopy

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jun 7,  7:18pm, Nikolas Garofil wrote:
}
} --- a/Src/prototypes.h
} +++ b/Src/prototypes.h
} @@ -130,5 +130,5 @@ extern char *strerror _((int errnum));
}  /***************************************************/
}  
}  #ifndef HAVE_MEMMOVE
} -extern void bcopy _((const void *, void *, int));
} +extern void bcopy _((const void *, void *, size_t));
}  #endif
} -- 

Pardon my paranoia, but are we sure that won't itself break somewhere?
A strict compiler that doesn't have size_t declared in scope, or that
does have bcopy() but it doesn't use size_t for it?

Yes, this is probably pretty unlikely nowadays, but obviously you found
one that doesn't have memmove() which I would have thought less likely.