[ossec-list] Re: string.h or strings.h

["Daniel Cid" <daniel.cid@xxxxxxxxx>]

He Leslie,

I can feel your pain :) I had some problems dealing with that
and I tought it was fixed by including strings.h (the CFLAG
is -include strings.h, not string.h) on Solaris. I was looking
at some man pages and I think we need to stop using
index/rindex and only use strchr/strrchr everywhere.

Look at what the openbsd man page says:

"
The index() function is deprecated and shouldn't be used in new code.
"

Thanks,

--
Daniel B. Cid
dcid @ ( at ) ossec.net


On 6/23/06, Leslie S Arvin <arvin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I've been installing ossec on Solaris, AIX, RedHat and working to
> port ossec-hids to HP-UX.  The string.h vs. strings.h issue has been
> making me crazy.  No matter which file I included I would get error
> messages and the '-include string.h' CFLAG was not working for Solaris.
> After analyzing which functions are included in which files, I decided to:
>
> 1. use '#include <string.h>' only.
> 2. convert all calls to index() and rindex() to strchr() and strrchr()
>     respectively.
>
>                  string.h        strings.h
> ------------------------------------------------------
> AIX             index           index
>                  strdup
>                  strchr
> ------------------------------------------------------
> RedHat          index           index
>                  strdup
>                  strchr
> ------------------------------------------------------
> SOLARIS 8 & 9                   index
>                  strdup
>                  strchr
> ------------------------------------------------------
> HPUX                            index
>                  strdup
>                  strchr
>
> This made my compiler shut up.  But this may not work on other OSes.
>
> According to www.gnu.org:
>
> "Some systems give these functions the names index and rindex; other
> systems use the names strchr and strrchr. Some systems support both
> pairs of names, but neither pair works on all systems."
> (http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/System-Functions.html)
>
> They recommend using strchr/strrchr and if they don't exist "define
> them as macros in terms of the other pair."  Unfortunately, their
> assumption that macros HAVE_STRCHR and HAVE_STRRCHR exist is invalid
> under Solaris 8 at least.
>
> So we'll have fun, fun, fun 'til the *nix puts the strchr() away.
>
> -- Leslie Arvin
>     arvin@xxxxxxxxxx, Office: FREH G409, Phone: 765-496-3971
>     Network Systems Administrator, ITI-Unix Platforms
>     Purdue University, Information Technology at Purdue
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---