Re: [bug-mailutils] nntp build failure

[Jordi Mallach]

On Sat, Jun 09, 2012 at 08:11:29AM +0300, Sergey Poznyakoff wrote:
> That's expected.  Nntp is still not implemented (btw. that's documented
> in the NEWS).

Oops. Sorry about the oversight. :)

> What we have now is 2.x code which does not build in the
> new framework.  Actually that's the only library that still needs to be
> rewritten.  I will address it when I have a couple of free days, but
> overall I regard it as a low priority issue, because in fact it is
> rather loosely connected with electronic mail.  Anyways, I'll let you
> know when it becomes available again.

Sure. Not that it's an important lib for me anyway.

> > The cxx code also fails to build. Not sure if this was a know issue.
> 
> No, it is not.  Can you send me the diagnostics it produces?

It's just a conflicting declaration:


libtool: compile:  g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I.. -I../include -I../include 
-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -DSYSCONFDIR=\"/etc\" -c folder.cc  -fPIC -DPIC -o 
.libs/folder.o
In file included from ../include/mailutils/cpp/folder.h:24:0,
                 from folder.cc:18:
../include/mailutils/cpp/list.h:28:43: error: conflicting declaration 'typedef 
int mu_list_action_t(void*, void*)'
In file included from ../include/mailutils/cpp/list.h:24:0,
                 from ../include/mailutils/cpp/folder.h:24,
                 from folder.cc:18:
../include/mailutils/list.h:144:15: error: 'mu_list_action_t' has a previous 
declaration as 'typedef int (* mu_list_action_t)(void*, void*)'
make[3]: *** [folder.lo] Error 1

Not sure which one is the intended one.

> No, I'd rather not.  In general C++ interface is functional, so I see no
> reason why it should be excluded.

Ok!

-- 
Jordi Mallach Pérez  --  Debian developer     http://www.debian.org/
address@hidden     address@hidden     http://www.sindominio.net/
GnuPG public key information available at http://oskuro.net/

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature