Martin MOKREJ� <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Is there any reason why you're not simply using systype alpha_dux50? It compiles for me on any 5.x.
> > You'll want to call flex with -l on OSF to get yylineno defined. > > OK, editing config.status to supply "flex -l" instead of flex and > rerunning it helps, so here's one error, which I "fixed" myself .... You'll get this with systype alpha_dux50. This is defined in src/cf/osconf.m4 [snip] > Commenting out both defines as below in src/lwp/lwp.c: > > #ifdef AFS_OSF_ENV > /*extern void *malloc(int size); > extern void *realloc(void *ptr, int size);*/ > #endif > pushes me further, but at the end another error: [snip] > cc: Error: ./fs_conv_411.c, line 487: In this statement, "umount" expects 2 >arguments, but 1 are supplied. (toofewargs) > umount(path); > -------^ You get conflicting types because you don't have _NO_PROTO defined. This is also defined in src/cf/osconf.m4 It's debatable whether it's a good thing to have to define, or not, but that's the way the buildsystem works. In short, I'd recomend you to use alpha_dux50 for systype instead. Also, for the flock thing in your last email. I don't think we're affected by flocks not being inherited across forks. From what I've seen we don't depend on a child getting an flocked file from it's parent. Others might still be interested to read http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/tru64-unix-managers/2002-04/msg00435.html /mattiasa _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
