[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] dhcpdump: Fix strsep() feature test

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Dear Benoît Thébaudeau,

On Mon,  4 Aug 2014 20:20:14 +0200, Benoît Thébaudeau wrote:

> diff --git a/package/dhcpdump/dhcpdump-1.8-fix-strsep-feature-test.patch b/package/dhcpdump/dhcpdump-1.8-fix-strsep-feature-test.patch
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..10b826c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/package/dhcpdump/dhcpdump-1.8-fix-strsep-feature-test.patch

All patches should have a description + Signed-off-by. Also, you should
use the proper naming convention for patches:

	<package>-<sequencenumber>-<description>.patch

I know there's already a patch for dhcpdump that doesn't follow this
convention, but you're invited to rename it as well :-)

> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
> +diff -Nrdup dhcpdump-1.8.orig/dhcpdump.c dhcpdump-1.8/dhcpdump.c
> +--- dhcpdump-1.8.orig/dhcpdump.c	2008-06-24 05:26:52.000000000 +0200
> ++++ dhcpdump-1.8/dhcpdump.c	2011-05-31 19:22:15.987388498 +0200
> +@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
> + #include <regex.h>
> + #include "dhcp_options.h"
> + 
> +-#ifndef HAVE_STRSEP
> ++#ifndef _BSD_SOURCE

Is _BSD_SOURCE really meant to be tested within source code? I thought
it was more the application or library that would #define _BSD_SOURCE
or #define _GNU_SOURCE to tell the C library which functions should be
made visible. But well, if strsep() depends on _BSD_SOURCE being
defined, I agree that testing _BSD_SOURCE is a way of knowing whether
it's available or not.

Are there some other opinions about this?

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com