On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 02:15:11PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote: > Svante Signell writes ("[Fwd: [ISC-Bugs #25979] What happened to the dhcp > patch in ISC-Bugs #24697 (Debian Bug #616290)?]"): > > Dear Debian/Hurd, GNU/Hurd and Debian-devel people. This arrived today. > > Any ideas on how to proceed? Is it possible to create a Hurd-specific > > fork of the latest ISC-DHCP release? DHCP is an essential package in the > > Debian Installer. > > I went and read the Debian bug report. The difficulty seems to be > with the patch "fix_ftbfs4hurd.dpatch". I have to say that on reading > that patch I understood upstream's reluctance. I don't think it looks > to me like a correct and appropriate fix for build portability > problems.
Hurd doesn't support PATH_MAX. So trying to allocate memory based on PATH_MAX isn't going to work on Hurd. However, with glibc (and with POSIX 1003.1-2008) we can simply mark the destination buffer to realpath as NULL and the appropriate amount of memory will be automatically allocated. Not all systems support this, though. I cannot comment on the remainder of the patch, but the PATH_MAX issue is a pretty common one for Hurd, and assuming PATH_MAX is a compile-time constant is a bad idea anyway, since it's not allowed by POSIX. -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US +1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature