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]
