Compiling 1.2.5 on True64 v5.x

[Ken Raeburn]

Peter Losher <plosher at wwiv.com> writes:
> Has anyone encountered an issue compiling Kerberos 1.2.5 on a Tru64 {5.0 or 
> 5.1) box using Compaq's C compiler?  Any pointers would be welcome.

I've got a 5.1A box here I've started doing more builds on; I'll try
1.2.5.

> cc: Error: /usr/include/netinet/in6.h, line 55: Missing type specifier or 
> type qualifier. (missingtype)
>         uint8_t sa6_addr[16];
> --------^

On my system, netinet/in6.h includes netinet/in6_machtypes.h, which
includes sys/bittypes.h, which as Tim Mooney said, defines these
types.


"Donn Cave" <donn at u.washington.edu> writes:
> Well, I just had a go at it with Digital UNIX 4.0, using DEC's
> C compiler.  What a mess!  Your compiler sure seems to be more
> tolerant than mine.  I'm having to fix several include files,
> where preprocessor macros were indented.  (Folks, if you must
> indent a preprocessor macro, that's fine, but the # has to stay
> in the first column.)

And don't use too many of them newfangled prototype thingies.

Seriously, at this point, we are pretty much assuming C89 support or
better, and C89 does permit whitespace before the #.  But we may go
change this anyways.  A quick survey of, uh, about three or four of us
at MIT indicates a preference for having the whitespace after the #,
like we have in lots of other places already, and we might as well
make it all consistent.


Tim Mooney <mooney at dogbert.cc.ndsu.nodak.edu> writes:

> I've seen two cases where this happens:
>
> 1) You have bind 8.x (or perhaps 9.x) installed somewhere, and the
> sys/bitypes.h file from bind is getting picked up before the
> /usr/include/sys/bitypes.h file, which has the necessary definitions for
> uint8_t, etc.
>
> 2) You have a completely unpatched 5.0 box, and there's some bug in the
> in6.h that was fixed in a patch.
>
> I'm pretty hazy on the details for #2, but #1 took me a long time to
> figure out when I ran into the problem a while back.
>
> Basically, if you install bind 8.x or 9.x, do *not* install its version
> of sys/bitypes.h with the rest of bind's include files.

Interesting.  Thanks for the info.
Peter, was one of these the cause of your problem?

Ken