On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 08:26:46 -0800 Wes wrote:
WH> >>>>> On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 10:44:29 +0000, Dave Shield
WH> >>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
WH> 
WH> >> 2) --with-cflags=-DDISMAN_EVENT_OLD_IMPLEMENTATION
WH> 
WH> Dave> Yuck!!
WH> Dave> Sorry - I *MUCH* prefer the previous approach.
WH> 
WH> FYI, I think it's a mistake to include 2 different almost identical
WH> named .h files for doing the same thing.  IMHO, we should not be
WH> requiring a change in configure options to get the new version.  We
WH> should be using the old header to include the new files.

I agree with this, and that's why I changed it to do exactly that.

WH> It seems wiser to me to move the old header to old-disman-event.h or
WH> something so people have to explicitly request it.

I considered that too, but don't really like that option. But if it's the will
of the people...  More on this in my response to Dave's message..

-- 
Robert Story; NET-SNMP Junkie
Support: <http://www.net-snmp.org/> <irc://irc.freenode.net/#net-snmp>
Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=net-snmp-coders>

You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different. 


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download
it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own
Sony(tm)PSP.  Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders

Reply via email to