Re: suggested fix
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 (k)FreeBSD-specific, so a test for
> FreeBSD || FreeBSD_kernel would not be appropriate. It might "work" but
> would only replace one portability issue with another.
> The new test for AF_LINK && !GNU looks even worse to me. Does GNU/Hurd
> _really_ define AF_LINK and yet not provide a net/if_dl.h with a
> definition for sockaddr_dl?
As I understood it you wanted the build to fail on Hurd so everyone
would know there was an AF_LINK/sockaddr_dl bug on Hurd. I am not
convinced that that is the right tack to take. I discussed the more
general AF_LINK/sockaddr_dl issue with Pino today, and he's going to
follow up on. But for now I'm just trying to get this package to build
in a sane - if not ideal - way. I'm still open to arguments of course
especially from the maintainer.