From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#18238: Fix for DOS build when using more accurate config[.h].in Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 21:28:34 +0300 Message-ID: <83ha1kjj1p.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83lhqwjk4i.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1407695364 16061 80.91.229.3 (10 Aug 2014 18:29:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:29:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 18238@debbugs.gnu.org To: Reuben Thomas Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 10 20:29:17 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XGXrn-0006Gm-PF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 20:29:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60621 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGXrn-0006CJ-9b for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:29:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45481) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGXrf-0006Aw-7U for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:29:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGXra-0003D6-5A for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:29:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:59253) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XGXra-0003D2-1a for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:29:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XGXrZ-0001lp-JC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:29:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:29:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18238 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 18238-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18238.14076953306782 (code B ref 18238); Sun, 10 Aug 2014 18:29:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 18238) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Aug 2014 18:28:50 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37963 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XGXrO-0001lJ-6f for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:28:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout28.012.net.il ([80.179.55.184]:39302) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XGXrL-0001l3-P7 for 18238@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:28:48 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout28.012.net.il by mtaout28.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NA300I00SFFEQ00@mtaout28.012.net.il> for 18238@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 21:28:06 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout28.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NA300J4PSMU5900@mtaout28.012.net.il>; Sun, 10 Aug 2014 21:28:06 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:92389 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 19:20:48 +0100 > From: Reuben Thomas > Cc: 18238@debbugs.gnu.org > > > I don't see why the suggested code is better than the existing one. > > HAVE_GETRLIMIT means more than its name says, as you point out, so > > DJGPP is correct in not defining one. > > > > I think I was unclear, sorry: DJGPP does define getrlimit. It is only the > MSDOS config.in that says it is not defined. If you run ./configure, then > it detects getrlimit, and defines HAVE_GETRLIMIT. Then it's a bug in the configure test for getrlimit: it should not only test for the existence of the function, but also for RLIMIT_AS and RLIMIT_DATA it actually needs.