From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15806 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2005 17:50:55 -0000 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 17 Aug 2005 17:50:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 74426 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2005 17:50:49 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.247.90) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 17 Aug 2005 17:50:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 5596 invoked by alias); 17 Aug 2005 17:50:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 21651 Received: (qmail 5587 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2005 17:50:43 -0000 Received: from news.dotsrc.org (HELO a.mx.sunsite.dk) (130.225.247.88) by sunsite.dk with SMTP; 17 Aug 2005 17:50:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 74136 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2005 17:50:43 -0000 Received: from dsl3-63-249-88-2.cruzio.com (HELO dot.blorf.net) (63.249.88.2) by a.mx.sunsite.dk with SMTP; 17 Aug 2005 17:50:39 -0000 Received: by dot.blorf.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 94BA5945; Wed, 17 Aug 2005 10:50:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 10:50:38 -0700 From: Wayne Davison To: Andrey Borzenkov Cc: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: SunOS build failures for the last 2 days Message-ID: <20050817175038.GC21995@blorf.net> References: <20a80721050817080831aad306@mail.gmail.com> <20050817171529.GB21995@blorf.net> <200508172135.53752.arvidjaar@newmail.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200508172135.53752.arvidjaar@newmail.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.4 On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 09:35:29PM +0400, Andrey Borzenkov wrote: > Are you sure it was built? He said it was building fine before ZLE_UNICODE_SUPPORT got turned on, which indicates to me either that wint_t is actually there, or that the ifdef before the use of the wint_t doesn't succeed: #if defined(HAVE_WCHAR_H) && defined(HAVE_WCTOMB) && defined(__STDC_ISO_10646__) If the latter is true, then I can only imagine that the #error directive didn't work as expected in the multibyte AC_TRY_COMPILE in configure. > Anyway it also means conditions in getkeystring should be replaced by > single ZLE_UNICODE_SUPPORT. No. Those are there to support the u and U escapes in printf, even when ZLE_UNICODE_SUPPORT is disabled (this was just recently pointed out to me). ..wayne..