[distcc] distcc-2.12 on IRIX

[Dimitri Papadopoulos-Orfanos]

Hi,

Martin Pool wrote:
 >
 > > By the way, about the accept() argument type (int, size_t, or
 > > socklen_t) issue I had already reported in a previous post, an
 > > autoconf macro is available after all. See:
 > > http://www.gnu.org/software/ac-archive/htmldoc/ac_prototype_accept.html
 > > 
http://www.gnu.org/software/ac-archive/htmldoc/ac_func_accept_argtypes.html
 > > It would be better to fix this specific issue, as I think it could
 > > break 64-bit builds where the type of the argument is actually
 > > important.
 >
 > Are there any such platforms that don't already have a socklen_t?

Probably not, you're right about that. I think socklen_t was introduced 
partly for transitioning to 64-bit platforms, so I guess it is always 
defined when building 64-bit targets.

 > >From a bit more reading it looks like we should actually define
 > socklen_t to int if it's not defined, rather than size_t.  According
 > to some documentation the size arguments were int * on most old
 > systems.

Originally the argument was "int". Then for some reason it was made a 
"size_t". Then "socklen_t" was introduced, at least partly for 
supporting 64-bit computing.

I think most Unix machines still use "int" by default for 32-bit targets 
(unless some macros are defined to enable recent APIs). On the other 
hand recent Linux or BSD systems that care less about compatibility use 
"socklen_t". There are still some systems using "size_t", not many of 
them I must agree. For exampel AIX 4.1 uses "int", AIX 4.2 uses 
"size_t", and AIX 4.3 uses "socklen_t".

I think it would be nice to use the autoconf macro. It's available and 
it's robust. Why not use it? It'll save a few warnings on most Unix 
platforms.

--
Dimitri