Re: Netsurf build failure: 'PATH_MAX' undeclared
Jeffrey Walton, le lun. 26 avril 2021 15:08:28 -0400, a ecrit:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 2:58 PM Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> wrote:
> >
> > Jeffrey Walton, le lun. 26 avril 2021 14:48:32 -0400, a ecrit:
> > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 6:57 AM João Pedro Malhado <phlogiston@sapo.pt> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 01:39:58PM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > > > > João Pedro Malhado, le jeu. 22 avril 2021 13:10:04 +0200, a ecrit:
> > > > > > > src/time.c:25:10: fatal error: mach/clock.h: No such file or directory
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=netsurf
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is this something easy to fix and patch?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, see https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd/porting/guidelines.html#mach_clock
> > > > >
> > > > > > would there be other packages in the repository affected by the same
> > > > > > problem?
> > > > >
> > > > > Various packages wrongly think that mach == apple. The fix is usually
> > > > > very simple.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you Samuel for the useful pointers.
> > > >
> > > > I made some simple changes to the time.c file and the build went on, only to
> > > > fail at some later stage. The error that I'm getting is:
> > > >
> > > > frontends/gtk/fetch.c: In function 'nsgtk_get_resource_url':
> > > > frontends/gtk/fetch.c:252:11: error: 'PATH_MAX' undeclared (first use in this
> > > > function)
> > > > 252 | char buf[PATH_MAX];
> > > >
> > > > Now, the only C I know is what I can guess from other programming languages I'm
> > > > familiar with, but this seems simple and not very hurd specific. However the
> > > > build does not seem to have any problems on other platforms, so I don't know.
> > > > Anyone has an idea on how to best approach this?
> > >
> > > Ensure you are including <limits.h> in the source file. That's usually
> > > the place PATH_MAX is defined.
> >
> > Please always read the porting guideline page, it discusses such things.
> >
> > > You can search for symbols on the Posix website at https://pubs.opengroup.org:
> > >
> > > https://www.google.com/search?q=PATH_MAX+site:pubs.opengroup.org
> >
> > Yes, but PATH_MAX is not mandatory, and it is indeed not defined on
>
> > GNU/Hurd. Please read the mentioned page.
>
> Instead of asking the world to do something special, perhaps Hurd
> should do what people expect?
People should *not* expect PATH_MAX to be defined.
Using PATH_MAX is most often a sign of laziness, that possibly entails
bugs or even security holes.
> Doing what the world expects is economical.
Yes. And we should also burn all the petrol we have on earth since it's
economical.
Samuel
Reply to: