Ah, the conflict occured when compiling with our application, not when compiling netsnmp itself...
Both patches still make sense in my opinion. Whom do I assign this to? Cheers, Thijs On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Thijs Brouwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Damn: see latest comment in track 1737727. > > Will report back when I have more data. > > Cheers, > Thijs > > On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Thijs Brouwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Sorry, just forgot about them (well I hope I can partially blame my >> new 'brilliantly' concocted mail filter... ;-) ) >> >> Submitted two new patches. >> >> Let me know if there's still something I can do. There's a reasonable >> chance I will respond within 3 months. ;-) >> >> Cheers, >> Thijs >> >> On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Magnus Fromreide <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On mån, 2007-09-17 at 13:23 +0200, Thijs Brouwer wrote: >>>> Ok, I hope to be able to submit the patches tonight. >>> >>> Ok, I know this is a very late followup but the patches seem to never >>> have showed up as the problematic code is still present. Did you just >>> forget them or was there some other trouble that showed up? >>> >>> /MF (Tried to build on AIX 5.3...) >>> >>>> On 9/12/07, Thomas Anders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> > Dave Shield schrieb: >>>> > > I'm inclined to suggest that the problematic #defines are protected by >>>> > > #ifndef NETSNMP_NO_LEGACY_DEFINITIONS >>>> > > >>>> > > and that the config also sets up >>>> > > >>>> > > #ifdef NETSNMP_CLEAN_NAMESPACE >>>> > > #define NETSNMP_NO_LEGACY_DEFINITIONS >>>> > > #endif >>>> > >>>> > Agreed. >>>> > >>>> > >> I don't have access to subversion here. Who introduced >>>> > >> NETSNMP_CLEAN_NAMESPACE in revision 15493? >>>> > > >>>> > > That would be Thomas. >>>> > > As was NETSNMP_CLEAN_NAMESPACE in r15194. >>>> > > (Which is why I phrased the question in the way I did!) >>>> > >>>> > As for NETSNMP_CLEAN_NAMESPACE, I think I've checked in a patch proposed >>>> > by someone else, but I'm taking full responsibility anyway (especially >>>> > for forgetting that I've introduced NETSNMP_NO_LEGACY_DEFINITIONS >>>> > earlier). The above should provide a clean fix, though. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > +Thomas >>>> > >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft >>>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. >>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Net-snmp-coders mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders >>> >>> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sponsored by: SourceForge.net Community Choice Awards: VOTE NOW! Studies have shown that voting for your favorite open source project, along with a healthy diet, reduces your potential for chronic lameness and boredom. Vote Now at http://www.sourceforge.net/community/cca08 _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
