|
From: | Steve Little |
Subject: | Re: Porting patch to VMS |
Date: | Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:11:00 +0000 (GMT) |
Hi Paul, On Thu, 18 Mar 2004, Paul Eggert wrote: > > 1) I get a bunch of compiler warnings about implicitly declared functions, > > which could be fixed by including a few more standard headers (mostly > > unistd.h, fcntl.h and stdlib.h) in a few places. > > That'd be fine. Done, in patch-includes.diff > > but I wondered why it's there at all? Is it simply for systems that > > don't have a real fseek function? > > It's to insulate the rest of the code from the distinction between > fseek and fseeko. We can change the name to something else. f_seek, > say. Ok, done, in patch-fseek.diff > > Would this not be better changed to #error "you must run..."? > > These days, yes. The code was written that way to port to K&R compilers > that lacked #error. Please put this stuff into a separate patch, though, > as it doesn't matter with respect to VMS. Done, in xmalloc.c.diff. Hope these are all ok. I've also attached a patch for config.h_vms, to add a couple of extra #defines related to the new includes. See config.h_vms.diff Thanks, Steve
xmalloc.c.diff
Description: Text document
config.h_vms.diff
Description: Text document
patch-includes.diff
Description: Text document
patch-fseek.diff
Description: Text document
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |