Pavlin Radoslavov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jonathan Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I'll get the Windows patches sorted out as a single > > unit. For now, however, there's a trivial fix needed > > in strptime.c. It includes strings.h automatically, > > whether or not configure found it. This needs to be > > replaced with the following: > > > > #ifdef HAVE_STRINGS_H > > #include <strings.h> > > #else > > #include <string.h> > > #endif
For the record, now <strings.h> is guarded with #ifdef HAVE_STRINGS_H. The fix is applied in the following CVS commit: Revision Changes Path 1.17 +5 -2; commitid: b0d2482b86cd41a7; xorp/libxorp/strptime.c Thanks, Pavlin > What OS (and OS version) are you using? > If it is Windows, currently XORP works on only few Windows versions, > and even then you need to install more things (see file BUILD_NOTES, > Section 3.7). > > About the above patch, unfortunately it won't work the way it is, > because the story with the include files in strptime.c in particular > is slightly complicated (see the comments where _XOPEN_SOURCE is > defined. > Also, note that "config.h" is included after <strings.h> and > <string.h> therefore the "#ifdef HAVE_STRINGS_H" statement won't > matter. > > The correct solution would be to try to move #include "config.h" > before <strings.h> and then use something like: > > #ifdef HAVE_STRINGS_H > #include <strings.h> > #endif > #ifdef HAVE_STRING_H > #include <string.h> > #endif > > Unfortunately, given the fragile situation with the header file > inclusion in strptime.c, doing even something like this needs to be > carefully tested that it doesn't break the compilation on all > platforms supported currently by XORP. > > Thanks, > Pavlin > > > There seem to be some issues with POSIX vs. ISO C99 > > calls vs. secure alternatives to standard functions, > > but I'm still trying to figure out the "best" solution > > to this as this would touch a lot of source. I need to > > come up with a solution, as Windows complains bitterly > > about older calls, but it would be better if any > > version submitted into the main source tree was agreed > > on as the (nominally) best solution. > > > > Jonathan Day > > > > Jonathan > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > > Be a better friend, newshound, and > > know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. > > http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Xorp-hackers mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers > > _______________________________________________ > Xorp-hackers mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers _______________________________________________ Xorp-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers
