From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/455 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Isaac Dunham Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Is "memory.h" wanted? Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 23:37:16 -0700 Message-ID: <20110824233716.397d1727@newbook> References: <20110822183710.c2fcfa28.idunham@lavabit.com> <20110823014433.GC132@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20110823000637.813c40f2.idunham@lavabit.com> <20110823121744.GD132@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1314254259 25192 80.91.229.12 (25 Aug 2011 06:37:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 06:37:39 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-456-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Aug 25 08:37:32 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QwTZC-0000Hj-Pm for gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2011 08:37:30 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 28216 invoked by uid 550); 25 Aug 2011 06:37:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 28206 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2011 06:37:28 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lavabit; d=lavabit.com; b=BFr0x33iwLypz7fO4LpXCrnpJgXOw1PeOk/AFdBWLFCm9EON3EQ1cS/e59jy8NnZBu6x++T/97u6TLwpVOCz1+OvNB4NogFwTw8ut2IOdbVz99RKhDu1ZjE7DTSYAXIXl2+G8TKs6cWxSiEZBeShi6UxMGr7GHwwpCxWZ3w0/7E=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:X-Mailer:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; In-Reply-To: <20110823121744.GD132@brightrain.aerifal.cx> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.4 (GTK+ 2.20.1; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:455 Archived-At: On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 08:17:44 -0400 Rich Felker wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:06:37AM -0700, Isaac Dunham wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 21:44:33 -0400 > > Rich Felker wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 06:37:10PM -0700, Isaac Dunham wrote: > > > > I recently tried building OpenSSL, and it failed to build due > > > > to a missing "memory.h". > > > > > > Which, IIRC, means a BSD-flavored/other legacy string.h > > > > Is this header desired for compatability, or should code using > > > > it be considered non-conformant and patched? > > > > > > Probably both, i.e. we should add it and OpenSSL should be > > > patched. In the long term I'm thinking about adding #warning to > > > all of the nonsensical legacy headers and wrong-location headers > > > (missing sys/- prefix or incorrect sys/- prefix) to help track > > > down and correct such errors in programs. > > I had assumed the header wanted was a libc header; however, when I > > looked up memory.h, the recommended header to use was a *private* > > kernel header (not one of the cleaned headers). There was talk about > > Where did this information come from? The *only* thing "memory.h" is > for is memcpy, memset, etc. which belong in string.h and have always > been in string.h. The whole "memory.h" thing was some BSD nonsense, > probably because they preferred their bzero, bcopy, etc. interfaces > and were bitter than mem* was adopted by ANSI/ISO C. > > Rich http://www.mail-archive.com/openssl-dev@openssl.org/msg28700.html I quote: "memory.h is in the following path: [ I am using Linux debian 2.6.26-2-686 #1 SMP Thu Nov 25 01:53:57 UTC 2010 i686 GNU/Linux ] /usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.26-2-686/include/linux/memory.h So make sure your path is set properly to include the linux include files" I'm not certain if this fellow got things right, though.