I can't argue with that logic but documenting it in a wiki or INSTALL or
including the patches with the distribution might be more agreeable.
And yes, the patch below was a cut and paste from your patch. I didn't mean
to say otherwise just to point out that for gcc 2.96, only two small array
size changes were needed.
Regards,
KAM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sven Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This is included in my patch already, but Timo didn't want to commit it,
since [0] is gcc specific, and [] is C99 standard.
Kevin A. McGrail schrieb:
As a follow-up on this, these two lines also helped me to compile the
1.1rc1 on gcc 2.96:
diff -ru dovecot-1.1.beta13/src/lib/str-find.c
dovecot-1.1.beta13.patched/src/lib/str-find.c
--- dovecot-1.1.beta13/src/lib/str-find.c Tue Oct 23 16:01:16 2007
+++ dovecot-1.1.beta13.patched/src/lib/str-find.c Thu Jan 17
14:08:03 2008
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
unsigned int match_count;
int badtab[UCHAR_MAX+1];
- int goodtab[];
+ int goodtab[0];
};
static void init_badtab(struct str_find_context *ctx)
diff -ru dovecot-1.1.beta13/src/lib-imap/imap-match.c
dovecot-1.1.beta13.patched/src/lib-imap/imap-match.c
--- dovecot-1.1.beta13/src/lib-imap/imap-match.c Sun Dec 9
19:14:27 2007
+++ dovecot-1.1.beta13.patched/src/lib-imap/imap-match.c Thu Jan
17 14:09:02 2008
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
struct imap_match_pattern *patterns;
char sep;
- char patterns_data[];
+ char patterns_data[0];
};
