[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3
From: |
Neil W Rickert |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3 |
Date: |
Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:19:08 -0600 |
Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> wrote on Feb 26, 2004:
>>Does 2.1 always install sasl.h in a "sasl" subdirectory? If so,
>>you could change it from #include <sasl.h> to #include <sasl/sasl.h> to get
>>around the problem.
>No, traditionally (installing it from the SASL distribution) it gets
>installed in $(prefix)/include. Sigh, another RedHat difference.
Strange.
On my system, the headers were all installed in $(prefix)/include/sasl
The headers for 1.5 were installed in $(prefix)/include
>>Otherwise, some autoconf support will be necessary.
>Since you can specify CPPFLAGS=-I/usr/include/sasl, I don't think it's
That's probably a mistake. The "#include" statements should be
specify "<sasl/sasl.h>". It is usually bad practice to list a
subdirectory of "/usr/include" in a "-I" directive.
-NWR
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, (continued)
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Scott Blachowicz, 2004/02/24
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Scott Blachowicz, 2004/02/25
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Dan Harkless, 2004/02/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Ken Hornstein, 2004/02/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Dan Harkless, 2004/02/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Ken Hornstein, 2004/02/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3,
Neil W Rickert <=
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Ken Hornstein, 2004/02/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Dan Harkless, 2004/02/26
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Glenn Burkhardt, 2004/02/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Dan Harkless, 2004/02/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] RC3, Dan Harkless, 2004/02/27