On Nov 27, 2009, at 11:24 AM, devzero2000 wrote:
>>>
>>>    complete changing db2offset data type to uint32_t everywhere
>> Should've rather been rpmuint32_t, no?
> Yes, but uint32_t is used in many place now and i have no clue why :
> Just a typo perhaps?. Is is right to change everywhere ? BTW, no
> problem in doing this.

It's a bit confusing.

The rpmuint32_t et al typedefs should be using for integers derived from
Header metadata.

At one point, rpmuint32_t was also used to avoid newer C types like  
uint32_t
for portability but that battle was lost more than a year ago.

Meanwhile, the rpmdb schema change now has a uint32_t primary index on
Packages. IIRC "unsigned int" was used before.

hth

73 de Jeff