Thank you, Jim. I really appreciated your input. I tried Viktor's way and it did compile (woot woot) - I will just get a confirmation from Viktor if the way I did is ok.
Sincerely, Takae Harrington Unix Administrator Cloud Managed Service Delivery (MSD) IBM GTS SO Delivery Office: 720-342-6749 Email: thar...@us.ibm.com From: Jim Reid <j...@rfc1035.com> To: Takae Harrington/Phoenix/IBM@IBMUS Cc: postfix-users@postfix.org Date: 09/04/2015 05:01 PM Subject: Re: postfix3.0.2 compile error on AIX61/71 Sent by: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org On 4 Sep 2015, at 23:43, Takae Harrington <thar...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > does u_short/u_int, and unassigned makes difference? Maybe, maybe not. Consult your C compiler documentation. BTW I assume you meant "unsigned" instead of "unassigned". Though I doubt compiler documentation will help you because the definition of the ad field in this struct concerns the position of a single bit in the DNS header. It probably doesn't matter if that gets typed as an unsigned or u_int or whatever because it's just 1 bit. C compilers are usually not too fussy about bit field definitions. Maybe your C compiler cares about that, I don't know. (Or care: I've never used AIX and never will.) That said, the definitions found in your #include files should be appropriate for your C compiler. If this struct really does have an ad field defined for the AD bit on your system, there may well be some AIX #ifdef goop somewhere else which is messing things up. Perhaps there's two or more struct HEADER definitions in /usr/include/arpa/nameser_compat.h and your C compiler is picking up the wrong one when it compiles postfix. You're on your own from this point if you want to continue. I can't help you fix or debug AIX #include files, even if I wanted to. Perhaps you can raise an internal support request inside IBM. You also have the option of following the advice Viktor supplied yesterday.
