Version script vs. mangled names on systems where size_type != unsigned int

[Dave Korn]

Paolo Carlini wrote:
> On 12/17/2009 11:40 AM, Dave Korn wrote:
>> Should we just add a 'y' in there? I think it might be that this hasn't
>> been a problem on any of the other 64-bit arches because win64 is the only
>> LLP64 target we support, and it's only just gained support for shared libstdc;
>> on all the other 64-bit targets the size_type will still be an unsigned
>> integer, but on this target the ABI says that size_type is a ULL, so that
>> means that the signatures of ABI functions are going to be different on this
>> machine from other machines.
>>   
> Yes, it's fine, I added some comments to the audit trail before seeing
> this message of yours.

  Thanks.  It turns out to involve quite a few patterns, not just one, so I'd
better post the patch for approval when it's ready anyway.

    cheers,
      DaveK