Re: Bug 221855

[tom r <info@reinertson.com>]

Jeff,

Hmmpf, that fix was easier than simple.  I should have figured that out 
for myself.  Thanks for your patience.

Tom


Jeff Bailey wrote:

> I don't know.  I'm sure that someone has likely told him by now.  I'm
> not a qmail user, but there are patches all over the place for it.
>
> The fix is pretty simple.  Remove all instances of:
>
> extern int errno;
>
> And replace with:
>
> #include <errno.h>
>
> Tks,
> Jeff Bailey
>
> On Sat, Dec 27, 2003 at 04:22:07PM -0700, tom r wrote:
>  
>
> > Jeff,
> >
> > Do you know if Dan Bernstein is aware qmail's non-compliance and if he 
> > plans to fix it?  Or does he want someone else to fix it?
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Tom
> >
> >
> > Jeff Bailey wrote:
> >
> >    
> >
> > > On Fri, 2003-12-26 at 19:22, tom r wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >      
> > >
> > > > I've seen a lot of reports of this bug:
> > > >
> > > > ld.so: Incorrectly built binary which accesses errno or h errno directly.
> > > >
> > > > but haven't seen any work arounds or anyone talking about a fix.  Can 
> > > > you tell me when a fix might be released?
> > > >  
> > > >
> > > >        
> > > The best fix is to fix the broken programs that don't comply with the C
> > > specifications.  The second best fix is to wait until the next glibc
> > > upload, which should have the warning disabled by default.
> > >
> > > The broken programs will need to be fixed anyway, since we can't
> > > maintain compatibility with these bugs forever.  But the glibc for Sarge
> > > will be fine.  It's not obvious yet what will happen for Sarge+1.
> > >
> > > Tks,
> > > Jeff Bailey
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >      
>
>
>