Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: UTF-8 locales on BSDs do not support collation correctly
- X-seq: zsh-workers 40420
- From: Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh workers <zsh-workers@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: UTF-8 locales on BSDs do not support collation correctly
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 17:57:17 +0000
- Cms-type: 201P
- In-reply-to: <CAHYJk3SYjNM1jDmzvhOOm7sTGTSkKg+ws8RkqRbeR3z=qeKTuw@mail.gmail.com>
- List-help: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
- List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- Organization: Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre
- References: <D8FAAD99-A0A8-48B5-9636-620ADB815B21@kba.biglobe.ne.jp> <CGME20170125180232epcas5p16dff9be3a099a11458ad28a6eb2d2d92@epcas5p1.samsung.com> <CAHYJk3SYjNM1jDmzvhOOm7sTGTSkKg+ws8RkqRbeR3z=qeKTuw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 19:02:29 +0100
Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> It works fine on OpenBSD. However, I had to revert 40333 for it to
> compile there. Adding some extra CCs since the mailing list probably
> still doesn't work.
> gmake: Entering directory '/home/mikachu/code/zsh/Src'
> gcc -c -I. -I../Src -I../Src -I../Src/Zle -I. -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -Wall
> -Wmissing-prototypes -O2 -o watch.o watch.c
> watch.c: In function 'readwtab':
> watch.c:488: warning: implicit declaration of function 'setutent'
> watch.c:489: warning: implicit declaration of function 'getutent'
> watch.c:489: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast
> watch.c:512: warning: implicit declaration of function 'endutent'
> watch.c:(.text+0x43): undefined reference to `setutent'
> watch.c:(.text+0x48): undefined reference to `getutent'
> watch.c:(.text+0x73): undefined reference to `getutent'
> watch.c:(.text+0x83): undefined reference to `endutent'
This is obscure: the preprocessor appears to be both replacing and not
replacing getutent and setutent. I wonder if they are already
definitions that are being stomped on? Or the code should go
through a different branch entirely?
Evidently this is going to stay broken until someone with access to
OpenBSD looks at it.
(I will supply a patch that checks for setutxent etc., now I've noticed
there aren't any yet, but that doesn't appear to be the problem here,
Messages sorted by: