On Sat, 2007-03-10 at 05:49 +0530, Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray wrote: > > > Do I have the green signal to remove fdasd support from Hurd for the time > > > being, as David suggested? I have checked that this particular problem is > > > solved by doing so? > > > Conditionalize the DASD support code (fdasd*, vtoc*) so it's Linux only. > > There will likely never be a need for DASD support on Hurd. > > Please find the patch attached. > > I have basically checked for the existence of the __s390__ or the > __s390x__ constants. If either of them are found, the DASD support > code (dasd.c fdasd.c vtoc.c) is compiled. I am not sure whether > AC_CHECK_FUNC is the correct way to do it or not? AC_CHECK_DEFINE > (http://autoconf-archive.cryp.to/ax_check_define.html) seems to have > become obsolete. Should I use AC_CHECK_DECL? > > This much is enough to get Parted to compile on Hurd. However should > the DASD headers (fdasd.h and vtoc.h) in include/parted be also > conditionalized? I did not do it, since libparted/arch/linux.c is them > #included.
I would say yes for consistency. -- David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Red Hat / Westford, MA
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ parted-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel
