Your message dated Tue, 02 Mar 2004 14:33:17 +0900 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#233946: libc6-dev: <sys/un.h> does not define UNIX_PATH_MAX has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -------------------------------------- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 20 Feb 2004 21:45:42 +0000 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Feb 20 13:45:42 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from frigate.ext.technologeek.org (frigate.technologeek.org) [213.41.134.11] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1AuISs-0006XC-00; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 13:45:42 -0800 Received: by frigate.technologeek.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D75161C8F829; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:44:38 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: libc6-dev: <sys/un.h> does not define UNIX_PATH_MAX X-Mailer: reportbug 2.46 Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 22:44:38 +0100 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_18 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_02_18 X-Spam-Level: Package: libc6-dev Version: 2.3.2.ds1-11 Severity: normal Reading unix(7), I understand that <sys/un.h> should define UNIX_PATH_MAX, and in fact it does not. Is this intentional ? JB. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: powerpc (ppc) Kernel: Linux 2.6.2-rc1-ben1 Locale: LANG=C, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Versions of packages libc6-dev depends on: ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-11 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii linux-kernel-headers 2.5.999-test7-bk-15 Linux Kernel Headers for developme -- no debconf information --------------------------------------- Received: (at 233946-done) by bugs.debian.org; 2 Mar 2004 05:33:22 +0000 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 01 21:33:22 2004 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from omega.webmasters.gr.jp (webmasters.gr.jp) [218.44.239.78] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1Ay2Ww-0007E1-00; Mon, 01 Mar 2004 21:33:22 -0800 Received: from omega.webmasters.gr.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by webmasters.gr.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 645AADEB7C; Tue, 2 Mar 2004 14:33:17 +0900 (JST) Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 14:33:17 +0900 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Julien BLACHE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Carlos O'Donell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, GOTO Masanori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Bug#233946: libc6-dev: <sys/un.h> does not define UNIX_PATH_MAX In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.9.9 (Unchained Melody) SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.3 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Unebigory=F2mae?=) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.2 (i386-debian-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_01 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_01 X-Spam-Level: At Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:52:08 +0100, Julien BLACHE wrote: > > The snippet defines only example code for creating your own structure. > > You should probably be doing something like: > > > > struct sockaddr_un sizecheck; > > #ifndef UNIX_PATH_MAX > > #define UNIX_PATH_MAX sizeof(sizecheck.sun_path) > > #endif > > Hmm. I'll do that, yes. Thanks. > > > Julien, can this bug be closed? > > Yep. I close this bug. Julien, if you think manpage needs to write something about this, please reopen this bug and reassign it to manpages-dev. Regards, -- gotom -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]