Re: [Libvir] [PATCH] header file changes for Solaris

On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 01:59:41PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 09:06:55AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > >On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 05:26:39PM -0400, Mark Johnson wrote: > > >>This patch has the includes need to build on Solaris. > > >>I've been using ifdef linux & ifndef linux to distinguish > > >>between solaris and linux at this point. > > > > > >Looks ok aside from > > [..] > > > > No, I don't agree. We should use configure.in to test for the presence > > of header files and then do things like: > > > > #ifdef HAVE_STRINGS_H > > #include <strings.h> > > #endif > > For strings.h I don't see the point in making it conditional really, unless > we're going to do the same for every single other header we include. The > strings.h header is always present on Linux. In recent times stuff that was > previously in strings.h has moved to string.h, but they're still in the > original header too. So we should always include both string.h & strings.h > for maximum portability. Hum, I don't think they are really the same. In libxml2 I do a configure test for HAVE_STRINGS_H but string.h is included without checks in a lot of places.