Re: pgsql: Remove check for accept() argument types

I wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> What does the man page say the correct type 
>> would be?  size_t?

> The machine's not booted up right now :-(.  But I'm pretty sure we
> shouldn't consider using size_t here, as it's not real clear that that
> couldn't be 64 bits on any affected platforms.  Your previous research
> said that the desired type is 32 bits on all such platforms, so I think
> that "int" is correct; we need only debate signedness.

Hmm ... now that I'm in my office, I checked this and HPUX 10.20's
accept(2) man page saith

SYNOPSIS
      #include <sys/socket.h>

    AF_CCITT only
      #include <x25/x25addrstr.h>

      int accept(int s, void *addr, int *addrlen);

    _XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED only
      int accept(int s, struct sockaddr *addr, size_t *addrlen);

gaur is using -D_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED and hence building against the
latter definition.  (I found out quite a long time ago that without
_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED, this platform has a LOT of discrepancies from
SUS v2.)  Further down, there's

FUTURE DIRECTION
      The default behavior in this release is still the classic HP-UX BSD
      Sockets, however it will be changed to X/Open Sockets in some future
      release.  At that time, any HP-UX BSD Sockets behavior which is
      incompatible with X/Open Sockets may be obsoleted.  HP customers are
      advised to migrate their applications to conform to X/Open
      specification (see xopen_networking(7)).

So what it looks like to me is

(1) Original BSD Sockets defined the argument as "int *addrlen".
(I confirmed this by looking in an ancient copy of Stevens'
Unix Network Programming.)

(2) X/Open thought it'd be better to use size_t.

(3) POSIX decided to resolve the conflict by inventing socklen_t.
However, SUS v2 says specifically that socklen_t "is an unsigned opaque
integral type of length of at least 32 bits".  The "unsigned" part
was removed in later POSIX editions, which surprises me --- they don't
usually change the standard in the direction of less definiteness.

On the whole, I still think "unsigned int" is our best compromise.
But maybe we should use size_t and cite X/Open as authority.

            regards, tom lane