From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34563) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYypm-0000gr-B7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 11:32:11 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYypi-0006gD-78 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 11:32:10 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:34015) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYypi-0006fy-1n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 11:32:06 -0500 Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 16:32:02 +0000 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Message-ID: <20160225163202.GI10515@redhat.com> References: <1456414292-55363-1-git-send-email-emaste@freebsd.org> <56CF2BCE.6090504@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56CF2BCE.6090504@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] io: fix build on FreeBSD Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: Ed Maste , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 09:29:02AM -0700, Eric Blake wrote: > On 02/25/2016 08:31 AM, Ed Maste wrote: > > EAI_ADDRFAMILY is obsolete and FreeBSD/s netdb.h does not provide a > > definition. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ed Maste > > --- > > tests/test-io-channel-socket.c | 5 ++++- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/tests/test-io-channel-socket.c b/tests/test-io-channel-socket.c > > index 0697363..f4dbd60 100644 > > --- a/tests/test-io-channel-socket.c > > +++ b/tests/test-io-channel-socket.c > > @@ -63,7 +63,10 @@ static int check_protocol_support(bool *has_ipv4, bool *has_ipv6) > > > > gaierr = getaddrinfo("::1", NULL, &hints, &ai); > > if (gaierr != 0) { > > - if (gaierr == EAI_ADDRFAMILY || > > + if ( > > +#ifdef EAI_ADDRFAMILY > > + gaierr == EAI_ADDRFAMILY || > > +#endif > > gaierr == EAI_FAMILY || > > I'm not the biggest-fan of mid-expression #ifdefs. Can we rewrite this > to look more like: > > #ifndef EAI_ADDRFAMILY > #define EAI_ADDRFAMILY EAI_FAMILY > #endif > > and leave the conditional expression unchanged? I think that'll cause gcc 6 to whine about you checking the same value twice in the conditional, like how it complains that EWOULDBLOCK and EAGAIN are the same. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|