Charles Lepple wrote: > I thought the error that Zoltan saw might have been due to the next > line (the "const u_int32_t" bit), but I don't have a Solaris box to > test.
This could also be the case. We don't use 'u_int32_t' anywhere else in the sources, so this probably should be replaced by 'uint32_t' (which is defined in <stdint.h> and included by libshut.c for instance). Other than that (or the implementation error in glibc 2.1 I mentioned before), I don't see what could possibly be wrong with the construction. Best regards, Arjen _______________________________________________ Nut-upsuser mailing list Nut-upsuser@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser
