Re: suggested fix

2012-06-21 Thread Samuel Thibault
Nicholas Bamber, le Thu 21 Jun 2012 13:04:17 +0100, a écrit : > ++/* As per #678358, Hurd defines AF_LINK but does not > ++ * provide the functionality. When that bug is fixed > ++ * These three lines could be removed and #678375 closed. > ++ */ > ++#ifdef __GNU__ > ++#undef AF_LINK > ++#endif I'm

Re: suggested fix

2012-06-21 Thread Nicholas Bamber
On 21/06/12 11:14, Steven Chamberlain wrote: > On 21/06/12 08:57, Nicholas Bamber wrote: >> 3.) You seem to see it fit to willfully cause an FTBS on Hurd, to make a >> point. > > To willfully allow an existing FTBFS on GNU/Hurd, to become a more > explanatory FTBFS, which would someday go away an

Re: suggested fix

2012-06-21 Thread Steven Chamberlain
On 21/06/12 08:57, Nicholas Bamber wrote: > 3.) You seem to see it fit to willfully cause an FTBS on Hurd, to make a > point. To willfully allow an existing FTBFS on GNU/Hurd, to become a more explanatory FTBFS, which would someday go away and keep the intended functionality once the cause had bee

Re: suggested fix

2012-06-21 Thread Nicholas Bamber
On 20/06/12 22:50, Steven Chamberlain wrote: > You still didn't address that in your reply. > Steven, You seem to have three issues: 1.) feature based tests rather than platform based tests. I totally get the desirability of this. It means new OS 's or improvements to OS's get picked up a

Re: suggested fix

2012-06-20 Thread Steven Chamberlain
On 20/06/12 22:09, Nicholas Bamber wrote: > On 20/06/12 22:04, Steven Chamberlain wrote: >> This debdiff doesn't address the main point of my original mail: >> sockaddr_dl and net/if_dl.h are not (k)FreeBSD-specific, so a test for >> FreeBSD || FreeBSD_kernel would not be appropriate. You still di

Re: suggested fix

2012-06-20 Thread Nicholas Bamber
On 20/06/12 22:04, Steven Chamberlain wrote: > On 20/06/12 15:59, Nicholas Bamber wrote: >> Based upon the feedback I have received (including #debian-hurd) I am >> attaching a new debdiff. > > This debdiff doesn't address the main point of my original mail: > sockaddr_dl and net/if_dl.h are not (

Re: suggested fix

2012-06-20 Thread Steven Chamberlain
On 20/06/12 15:59, Nicholas Bamber wrote: > Based upon the feedback I have received (including #debian-hurd) I am > attaching a new debdiff. This debdiff doesn't address the main point of my original mail: sockaddr_dl and net/if_dl.h are not (k)FreeBSD-specific, so a test for FreeBSD || FreeBSD_ke

Re: suggested fix

2012-06-20 Thread Nicholas Bamber
Jamie, Based upon the feedback I have received (including #debian-hurd) I am attaching a new debdiff. Unless I get any more feedback I'll probably upload it tomorrow with a 2-day delay. diff -Nru pmacct-0.14.0/debian/changelog pmacct-0.14.0/debian/changelog --- pmacct-0.14.0/debian/changelo

Re: suggested fix

2012-06-20 Thread Steven Chamberlain
Hi Nicholas, On 20/06/12 12:53, Nicholas Bamber wrote: > Sorry I didn't notice the FTBS on hurd as I was concentrating on the > red. I guess I should have trusted the bug report title more. I only noticed on buildd.d.o that the failure was the same there. > However I am confused at what your are

Re: suggested fix

2012-06-20 Thread Nicholas Bamber
On 20/06/12 12:27, Steven Chamberlain wrote: > On 20/06/12 11:56, Nicholas Bamber wrote: >> I have a proposed fix as attached. It's built, signed and ready to go. >> If you have intentions to fix it yourself please reply and do so >> promptly. I'll run my fix past a few people for feedback but aft