On 27 Nov 2003, Harold L Hunt II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Martin, > > Martin Pool wrote: > > >On 27 Nov 2003, Harold L Hunt II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>>It's needed to make IPv6 support work, since sockaddr_in6 is typically > >>>bigger than sockaddr. > >> > >>Okay, that is reasonable. > >> > >> > >>>The intent of the change was that sockaddr_storage would only be used > >>>if you give --enable-rfc2553. RFC2553 requires sockaddr_storage. Is > >>>there a problem in how this is done? > >> > >>Hmm..., well, I don't see how that could be since there are no > >>preprocessor protections around the sockaddr_storage structures in > >>dparent.c and prefork.c. I didn't pass --enable-rfc2553 to configure > >>and I ran into build problems. So, I guess that there must be a problem > >>in the way that this got implemented. > > > > > >It's meant to be #defined in distcc.h. I've just changed the > >replacement type to dcc_sockaddr_storage to make it more clear. > > > >What was HAVE_SOCKADDR_STORAGE showing on Cygwin? > > I don't see HAVE_SOCKADDR_STORAGE in config.log, but I do see tests for > sockaddr_storage. Please see the attached config.log.bz2.
Can you please update, make maintainer-clean, and start again? -- Martin linux.conf.au -- Adelaide, January 2004 __ distcc mailing list http://distcc.samba.org/ To unsubscribe or change options: http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/distcc