From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26FD46DE0AAA for ; Sun, 14 May 2017 03:08:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.33 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.33 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.361, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLACK=1.7] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0BNlpWc5WM5u for ; Sun, 14 May 2017 03:08:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from danbala.ifoer.tuwien.ac.at (danbala.ifoer.tuwien.ac.at [128.130.168.114]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4A7D6DE0931 for ; Sun, 14 May 2017 03:08:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by danbala.ifoer.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix, from userid 116) id CE25EA522; Sun, 14 May 2017 12:08:07 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 12:08:07 +0200 From: Thomas Klausner To: David Bremner Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org, Jonathan Perkin , notmuch@freelists.org Subject: Re: notmuch-0.24.1: missing header include Message-ID: <20170514100807.nlsgkxsfh2ndprky@danbala> References: <20170420093944.xpkczqnztv4nwx7p@danbala> <87fug8z7tc.fsf@tethera.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87fug8z7tc.fsf@tethera.net> X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 10:08:21 -0000 On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 07:54:39PM -0300, David Bremner wrote: > > On Solaris, notmuch-0.24.1 does not compile because lib/message.cc > > uses index(3) but does not include strings.h. > > > > Please apply the attached patch or a similar one. > > > > Thanks, > > Thomas > > In master we've replaced index(3) with strchr(3). Does that fix your > issue, or is the include still needed? Since you already include that's fine. Thanks, Thomas