Re: [cp-patches] RFC: checking for socklen_t

2006-01-02 Thread Andreas Tobler 

Christian Thalinger wrote:

On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 23:42 +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote:

Well, he hasn't yet, but I'll add my comment here.

I'd like to see it as an unsigned int and not an int. Most systems I 
know use unsigned int for socklen_t. Posix.1g also recommends to use 
uint32_t for socklen_t.


Well, on this very special OS not even uint32_t is defined.  So i'd vote
for `unsigned int' if you think we should use unsigned.


That's fine with me. uint32_t is more or less 'unsigned int'.

Thanks,
Andreas



___
Classpath-patches mailing list
Classpath-patches@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches

Re: [cp-patches] RFC: checking for socklen_t

2006-01-01 Thread Tom Tromey 
 Twisti == Christian Thalinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Twisti And on this system socklen_t isn't defined.  This macro taken from
Twisti  http://ac-archive.sourceforge.net/Miscellaneous/type_socklen_t.html

I assume we can use macros from here in Classpath.

Twisti 2006-01-01  Christian Thalinger  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Twisti * configure.ac: Added TYPE_SOCKLEN_T call.
Twisti * m4/type_socklen_t: Added.

This is ok.

Twisti +  if test $ac_cv_type_socklen_t != yes; then
Twisti +AC_DEFINE(socklen_t, int, [Substitute for socklen_t])
Twisti +  fi

Kind of a bogus approach (better to use a real typedef), but whatever.

Tom


___
Classpath-patches mailing list
Classpath-patches@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches

Re: [cp-patches] RFC: checking for socklen_t

2006-01-01 Thread Mark Wielaard 
On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 15:24 -0700, Tom Tromey wrote:
  Twisti == Christian Thalinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
 Twisti And on this system socklen_t isn't defined.  This macro taken from
 Twisti  http://ac-archive.sourceforge.net/Miscellaneous/type_socklen_t.html
 
 I assume we can use macros from here in Classpath.

Yes, the ac-archive is distributed under GPLWithACException.

But please add a pointer to this inside the m4/type_socklen_t file
itself (make the first line of this file a comment with the above URL)

Thanks,

Mark


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Classpath-patches mailing list
Classpath-patches@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches

Re: [cp-patches] RFC: checking for socklen_t

2006-01-01 Thread Christian Thalinger 
On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 15:24 -0700, Tom Tromey wrote:
 Twisti +  if test $ac_cv_type_socklen_t != yes; then
 Twisti +AC_DEFINE(socklen_t, int, [Substitute for socklen_t])
 Twisti +  fi
 
 Kind of a bogus approach (better to use a real typedef), but whatever.

That's true, yes.  I'll commit it like this and we can change that.  But
i think it will not happen for many users, except me :-)

TWISTI


___
Classpath-patches mailing list
Classpath-patches@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches

Re: [cp-patches] RFC: checking for socklen_t

2006-01-01 Thread Andreas Tobler 

Christian Thalinger wrote:

Hi!

I tried to compile classpath on a quite old system:

$ uname -a   
OSF1 mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at V4.0 878 alpha


And on this system socklen_t isn't defined.  This macro taken from
 http://ac-archive.sourceforge.net/Miscellaneous/type_socklen_t.html

checks for socklen_t and define it to `int' if not found (Andrew Pinski
will surely complain here ;-)


Well, he hasn't yet, but I'll add my comment here.

I'd like to see it as an unsigned int and not an int. Most systems I 
know use unsigned int for socklen_t. Posix.1g also recommends to use 
uint32_t for socklen_t.


Andreas



___
Classpath-patches mailing list
Classpath-patches@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath-patches