RE: Configure question

[Patrik Stridvall]

> Martin Wilck  writes:
> > Very true. Perhaps the practical way would be to assume
> > HAVE_GETPWUID == HAVE_GETPWNAM and see whether someone with
> > a really strange platform complains (but see below).
>
> There's no reason to do that, it's trivial to check for both. If you
> use getpwnam() check for HAVE_GETPWNAM, if you use getpwuid() check
> for HAVE_GETPWUID. Simple, logical, and works even on strange
> platforms.

Of course. It was so obvious that I missed it. :-)

Still I think the code should verify that any assumptions
made str really true, if possible. Like:

#if defined(HAVE_GETPWUID) || defined(HAVE_GETPWNAM) ||
defined(HAVE_GETPWENT)
# if !(defined(HAVE_GETPWUID) && defined(HAVE_GETPWNAM) &&
defined(HAVE_GETPWENT))
#  error All or none of the functions getpwuid, getpwnam and getpwent are
assumed to exist
# endif
#endif

Configure question

[Alexandre Julliard]

Patrik Stridvall  writes:
> Still I think the code should verify that any assumptions
> made str really true, if possible. Like:
>
> #if defined(HAVE_GETPWUID) || defined(HAVE_GETPWNAM) ||
> defined(HAVE_GETPWENT)
> # if !(defined(HAVE_GETPWUID) && defined(HAVE_GETPWNAM) &&
> defined(HAVE_GETPWENT))
> #  error All or none of the functions getpwuid, getpwnam and getpwent are
> assumed to exist
> # endif
> #endif

There is absolutely no reason to do that, because we shouldn't assume
anything like that. As I said, if you use getpwnam() you check for
HAVE_GETPWNAM; whether getpwuid() also exists or not is completely
irrelevant.