Re: [Qemu-devel] Win2k host problem with {get,free}{addr,name}info()

From: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Win2k host problem with {get,free}{addr,name}info()
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 18:32:57 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTimT16vBO7Egubz=Wt5vT9E_HWrDhEgJw4JEGrYy@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C97C255.2020106@codemonkey.ws>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2471 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 8:21 PM, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> wrote:
> On 09/20/2010 03:03 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Blue Swirl<blauwirbel@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Anthony Liguori<anthony@codemonkey.ws>
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 09/19/2010 11:16 AM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Anthony Liguori<anthony@codemonkey.ws>
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 09/15/2010 02:11 PM, Blue Swirl wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I tried to test QEMU on Win2k, but there are run time errors because
>>>>>>> of missing {get,free}{addr,name}info() functions. After adding dummy
>>>>>>> defines in place, there are no more errors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I found a similar case, where a compatibility patch was proposed:
>>>>>>> http://trac.filezilla-project.org/ticket/1532
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The patch is a bit heavy, consisting of run time detection of Win2k
>>>>>>> and full replacements for the functions. Are there any alternative
>>>>>>> solutions? I'm by no means a Windows expert.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Win2k is EOL so I don't think it's useful for us to support it as a
>>>>>> host.
>>>>>>  So any type of patch is just going to add additional complexity for
>>>>>> very
>>>>>> little real gain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I made a compatibility patch based on the FileZilla patch. The impact
>>>>> is very low, outside of the new files added, only Makefiles are
>>>>> changed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does gnulib have a similar replacement function?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Very similar, in fact that must be the source.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The nice thing about gnulib is that in the long term, we could
>>>> potentially
>>>> use gnulib for compatibility and make sure to get updated code.
>>>>
>>>
>>> One problem is that the current versions use GPLv3.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, I made too hasty conclusions based on a few files.
>> getaddrinfo.c and inet_ntop.c are both GPLv2+.
>>
>
> Perfect, that works out very well then.

Sort of, gnulib needs some configuration before use. I made some hacks
to avoid that and also suppressed warnings by overriding QEMU_CFLAGS,
but it's getting ugly.

Actually, there's no 'configure' in gnulib HEAD even though
docs/INSTALL mentions that. Strange.

Is it possible to apply local patches to a submodule tree?

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Add-gnulib-as-a-submodule.patch --]
[-- Type: application/mbox, Size: 904 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: 0002-mingw-Win2k-support-for-getaddrinfo-etc.patch --]
[-- Type: application/mbox, Size: 3663 bytes --]