[openssl-users] Dealing with RFC2553 and RFC3493 where NI_MAXHOST and NI_MAXSERV no longer exist

Kurt Roeckx kurt at roeckx.be
Tue Jan 22 19:58:02 UTC 2019

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 06:40:05PM -0500, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> On 1/18/19 1:53 AM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > 
> > Going in circles trying to compile 1.1.1a with strict C99 and no
> > optimizations and with a ready to debug and single step resultant
> > library.
> Ignore all this.  Thou shalt not C99 here.

Our code base is currently C89/C90, with some extenions, but things
like gcc default to something like "gnu99", "gnu11" or "gnu17".
And we actually make use of some of those extensions not in C89.

The ones I know about:
- asm(): Most of those should go away if you define PEDANTIC. I
  think the only exception is code we compile when gcc is used.
- strdup() and strcasecmp() which are in POSIX, but not in C
- Setting the mutex type, which seems to be UNIX98 or XOPEN2K8
- isascii: XOPEN
- usleep: Was in POSIX, has been replaced by nanosleep
- long long: Since C99

Then we also use things like int32_t, but define the type ourself
if the compiler is C89. We detect C11 support for atomics.

Anyway, if you have a good patch to remove things that are no
longer in a standard, and it also works with older systems, I suggest
submit a patch.


More information about the openssl-users mailing list