[PATCH 00/10] Solaris support

[PATCH 00/10] Solaris support

[Blake Jones]

Hi all,

This patch series fixes several issues which are needed to allow notmuch
to build on Solaris 11.  I've been "testing" it for a month or so by
using Karel Zak's fork of mutt along with a copy of notmuch-0.13.2 that
I got to compile.  After a friend asked for a copy of my setup, I
decided to try to get my patches cleaned up enough to submit, so that he
wouldn't need to deal with them if he wanted to hack on it.

I don't have access to any machines running a modern version of Linux
(much less *BSD), so I haven't been able to check whether these changes
have broken any other platforms.  I've tried to follow the prevailing
idiom of compatibility checks and conditionally-set variables, to
minimize the impact on other platforms, but it's possible that I
overlooked something.

I'm really pleased with my experience using notmuch; using it along with
the fork of mutt has given me real control of my email for the first
time in many years.  So I'm happy to offer these changes up in the hopes
that they can be useful to others.

I'm not subscribed to the mailing list, so please CC me on any comments.
I'll also try to watch the web archives of the list just in case.

Blake

Re: [PATCH 00/10] Solaris support

[Jani Nikula]

On Sun, 04 Nov 2012, Blake Jones <blakej@foo.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch series fixes several issues which are needed to allow notmuch
> to build on Solaris 11.  I've been "testing" it for a month or so by
> using Karel Zak's fork of mutt along with a copy of notmuch-0.13.2 that
> I got to compile.  After a friend asked for a copy of my setup, I
> decided to try to get my patches cleaned up enough to submit, so that he
> wouldn't need to deal with them if he wanted to hack on it.

Thanks for doing this. I had a *very* brief look at the patches, and
commented on what I thought stood out. Otherwise I didn't spot anything
out of the ordinary, but I'd like it if someone else had a glance too.

BR,
Jani.

Re: [PATCH 00/10] Solaris support

[Blake Jones]

> Just now I don't have more time to comment and review more, but in the
> first 2/3 patches when I tried to compile I got problem NULL not
> defined.

Oh!  Yes, I should include <stdio.h> to pull in the definition of NULL.
I'll fix that.

> Another thing: you have this
> 
>  +# Whether the asctime_r function is standards-compliant
>  +# (if not, then notmuch will compile with -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS
>  +# to enable the standards-compliant version -- needed for Solaris)
> 
> which is not exactly so.. you added the following lines in compat.h
> 
>  +#if !STD_GETPWUID
>  +#define _POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS
>  +#endif
> 
> which is slightly different as -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS is equivalent to 
> #define _POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS 1
> 
> (you probably knew this and your comments have drifted from actual
> implementation but just to make sure)

I'll make the code and comment line up better.

Thanks for your comments.

Blake