X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to
	:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=DO7mLU8JJ0I+w+Qe
	k+x2BD591xzxEKkVtPgk994nobn3ITzJQYIPfICfnQEw23gpXOHbgJU2WVyX0/7X
	KikAXqi8jSaw0KEUQobLT8EkEx4VYVhDJ7E3IQA/Sczt3KPVQKwjYlhMuly7Qkf1
	eJnLAPq3CfUy8D7wRdfVRKeAtzA=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to
	:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=rTfAthinAyglHjIMBbM7kb
	92ANI=; b=HdcW+naJgA0SjeTwQZnmzMnpvrdBGLwrZox3rGGHiRSqzLyD0NMwER
	RprNP98bE2/QN6sBQMdS4DYMeFjgcZ2wRc2CmvgSBkjV4KjxEO/1NojrCYZraUYv
	eCzPGgJS5VuYEJxs2P3eS1bUv1MR263mbSIdC+tcH1rX227DPV7nI=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,BOTNET,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE autolearn=no version=3.3.1
Message-id:	<51785684.4090507@cygwin.com>
Date:	Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:02:44 -0400
From:	"Larry Hall (Cygwin)" <reply-to-list-only-lh AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-to:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Redefinition of `struct in6_addr'?
References:	<CAEE3Wrm8MwsN2MMNTRGdLgJvSHPnusJN-TXZrJFL-26BtrW_ng AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20130424154409 DOT GX26397 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <CAEE3Wrm4iARi33g3gOqfbyJ_Jwc6phQ8xNZSQ6=Cknj-bUQ1-g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CE9C056E12502146A72FD81290379E9A6095C4FA AT ENFIRHMBX1 DOT datcon DOT co DOT uk> <CAEE3Wr=cDmAKuJ5rDK0wYoW9hVYzdfTnXCvjVMUhe0qgC4kzGA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20130424175107 DOT GZ26397 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <20130424175359 DOT GH5968 AT type DOT youpi DOT perso DOT aquilenet DOT fr> <20130424181248 DOT GA26397 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <51782672 DOT 10509 AT cygwin DOT com> <CAEE3Wr=WXVVZk9eV1M4dXYvRofaMcGFi6nF5n4F6i7PpEEA-iA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
In-reply-to:	<CAEE3Wr=WXVVZk9eV1M4dXYvRofaMcGFi6nF5n4F6i7PpEEA-iA@mail.gmail.com>

On 4/24/2013 5:45 PM, Max Balduino wrote:
> This way the winapi32 headers don't declare struct
> in6_addr, I didn't check, but I guess they do so only #ifndef
> _CYGWIN_IN6_H, am I right?

No but close.  The w32api header checks for the definition of s6_addr.

-- 
Larry

_____________________________________________________________________

A: Yes.
 > Q: Are you sure?
 >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
 >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email?

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -