On Sat, Jun 09, 2012 at 08:11:29AM +0300, Sergey Poznyakoff wrote: > That's expected. Nntp is still not implemented (btw. that's documented > in the NEWS).
Oops. Sorry about the oversight. :)
> What we have now is 2.x code which does not build in the
> new framework. Actually that's the only library that still needs to be
> rewritten. I will address it when I have a couple of free days, but
> overall I regard it as a low priority issue, because in fact it is
> rather loosely connected with electronic mail. Anyways, I'll let you
> know when it becomes available again.
Sure. Not that it's an important lib for me anyway.
> > The cxx code also fails to build. Not sure if this was a know issue.
>
> No, it is not. Can you send me the diagnostics it produces?
It's just a conflicting declaration:
libtool: compile: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I.. -I../include -I../include
-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -DSYSCONFDIR=\"/etc\" -c folder.cc -fPIC -DPIC -o
.libs/folder.o
In file included from ../include/mailutils/cpp/folder.h:24:0,
from folder.cc:18:
../include/mailutils/cpp/list.h:28:43: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef
int mu_list_action_t(void*, void*)'
In file included from ../include/mailutils/cpp/list.h:24:0,
from ../include/mailutils/cpp/folder.h:24,
from folder.cc:18:
../include/mailutils/list.h:144:15: error: 'mu_list_action_t' has a previous
declaration as 'typedef int (* mu_list_action_t)(void*, void*)'
make[3]: *** [folder.lo] Error 1
Not sure which one is the intended one.
> No, I'd rather not. In general C++ interface is functional, so I see no
> reason why it should be excluded.
Ok!
--
Jordi Mallach Pérez -- Debian developer http://www.debian.org/
[email protected] [email protected] http://www.sindominio.net/
GnuPG public key information available at http://oskuro.net/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Bug-mailutils mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-mailutils
