> *** modules/poll-tests.orig 2008-09-29 11:32:59.0 +0200
> --- modules/poll-tests2008-09-29 11:32:45.0 +0200
> ***
> *** 18,20
> --- 18,21
> Makefile.am:
> TESTS += test-poll
> check_PROGRAMS += test-poll
> + test_poll_LDADD = $(LDADD) @LIBSOC
> *** modules/sys_select-tests.orig 2008-09-28 20:36:59.0 +0200
> --- modules/sys_select-tests 2008-09-28 19:43:06.0 +0200
> ***
> *** 16,21
> --- 16,22
> Makefile.am:
> TESTS += test-sys_select
> check_PROGRAMS += test-sys_select
> + test_sys_selec
Hi Simon,
> Ah, yes, I remember this. The module was never tested on Solaris
> before. Btw, possibly you'll need -lnsl too? I recall that the idiom
> to get anything moderately complex to build on Solaris was to add -lnsl
> -lsockets.
No, -lnsl is not needed always, and in particular not for t
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Here are two change requests regarding the 'sockets' module:
>
> 1) Currently it adds the library option -lws2_32 to LIBS. But I don't want
>to link all gettext tools against this libray, just because one program
>(test-sys_select) n
Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> According to Simon Josefsson on 1/24/2008 7:58 AM:
> | Since there weren't any other comments after close to a week, and the
> | 'sockets' module doesn't affect anyone that isn't strictly using it, I
> | have committed the patch below.
> |
> | + * tests/t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Simon Josefsson on 1/24/2008 7:58 AM:
| Since there weren't any other comments after close to a week, and the
| 'sockets' module doesn't affect anyone that isn't strictly using it, I
| have committed the patch below.
|
| + * tests/tes
Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Thanks for testing. I think the test "just happens" to fail under
> cygwin, but as long as that is always consistent, I think that is fine.
In a sense, HAVE_WINSOCK2_H=0 is in fact correct on Cygwin. Even though
the header is available it's not correct to include it in
Brian Dessent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>
>> continue to work under cygwin. Btw, could you quote the part from
>> config.log which explains _why_ the m4 macro fails under cygwin? It
>> isn't clear from the M4 check that it would fail under cygwin, but maybe
>> it is ju
Simon Josefsson wrote:
> continue to work under cygwin. Btw, could you quote the part from
> config.log which explains _why_ the m4 macro fails under cygwin? It
> isn't clear from the M4 check that it would fail under cygwin, but maybe
> it is just my lack of knowledge with cygwin. Still, if it
Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> According to Simon Josefsson on 1/18/2008 7:45 AM:
> | One thing worries me though; cygwin. I don't know if this is needed on
> | cygwin. I would expect the answer is no? The m4 check should fail on
> | cygwin, but I'm not sure it does right now.
>
> You
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Simon Josefsson on 1/18/2008 7:45 AM:
| One thing worries me though; cygwin. I don't know if this is needed on
| cygwin. I would expect the answer is no? The m4 check should fail on
| cygwin, but I'm not sure it does right now.
You ar
11 matches
Mail list logo
