From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42733 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oy8Ae-0007tK-2z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:06:29 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oy8Ac-0001zX-FW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:06:27 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.213.45]:45062) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oy8Ac-0001zG-DB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:06:26 -0400 Received: by ywg4 with SMTP id 4so2312335ywg.4 for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 12:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C99021A.1060700@codemonkey.ws> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:06:02 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Win2k host problem with {get,free}{addr,name}info() References: <4C911D8F.1060406@codemonkey.ws> <4C97A73C.4070102@codemonkey.ws> <4C97C255.2020106@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Blue Swirl Cc: qemu-devel On 09/21/2010 01:32 PM, Blue Swirl wrote: > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 8:21 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >> On 09/20/2010 03:03 PM, Blue Swirl wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Blue Swirl wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Anthony Liguori >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 09/19/2010 11:16 AM, Blue Swirl wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Anthony Liguori >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 09/15/2010 02:11 PM, Blue Swirl wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I tried to test QEMU on Win2k, but there are run time errors because >>>>>>>> of missing {get,free}{addr,name}info() functions. After adding dummy >>>>>>>> defines in place, there are no more errors. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I found a similar case, where a compatibility patch was proposed: >>>>>>>> http://trac.filezilla-project.org/ticket/1532 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The patch is a bit heavy, consisting of run time detection of Win2k >>>>>>>> and full replacements for the functions. Are there any alternative >>>>>>>> solutions? I'm by no means a Windows expert. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Win2k is EOL so I don't think it's useful for us to support it as a >>>>>>> host. >>>>>>> So any type of patch is just going to add additional complexity for >>>>>>> very >>>>>>> little real gain. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> I made a compatibility patch based on the FileZilla patch. The impact >>>>>> is very low, outside of the new files added, only Makefiles are >>>>>> changed. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Does gnulib have a similar replacement function? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Very similar, in fact that must be the source. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> The nice thing about gnulib is that in the long term, we could >>>>> potentially >>>>> use gnulib for compatibility and make sure to get updated code. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> One problem is that the current versions use GPLv3. >>>> >>>> >>> Sorry, I made too hasty conclusions based on a few files. >>> getaddrinfo.c and inet_ntop.c are both GPLv2+. >>> >>> >> Perfect, that works out very well then. >> > Sort of, gnulib needs some configuration before use. I made some hacks > to avoid that and also suppressed warnings by overriding QEMU_CFLAGS, > but it's getting ugly. > > Actually, there's no 'configure' in gnulib HEAD even though > docs/INSTALL mentions that. Strange. > > Is it possible to apply local patches to a submodule tree? > You mean in git? If you fork the submodule, you can carry patches and then merge back with the original tree. Regards, Anthony Liguori