On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 12:05 AM Guy Harris <gharris@sonic.net> wrote:
On Jun 20, 2023, at 11:27 PM, Guy Harris via tz <tz@iana.org> wrote:
On Jun 20, 2023, at 2:00 PM, enh via tz <tz@iana.org> wrote:
it's actually the openbsd strptime.c that's unhappy: ``` In file included from bionic/libc/tzcode/strptime.c:40:
I see the string "bionic" rather than "openbsd" there, so that appears to be *Bionic's* strptime.c that's unhappy. Is there a requirement that Bionic's strptime.c be unchanged from OpenBSD's?
In fact, the openbsd strptime.c, as of CVS revision 1.32:
https://cvsweb.openbsd.org/src/lib/libc/time/strptime.c?rev=1.31&content-typ...
does *not* contain the line
typedef struct state *timezone_t;
so it appears that it's the *Bionic* strptime.c that's unhappy.
(this is answered on the other thread: it's tz's "private.h" that contains that. i'm afraid without reading _both_ threads, the tz@ thread is going to be confusing.)