[gpm] socklen_t handling

[Mike Frysinger]

is there a reason the usage of socklen_t in gpm is inconsistent ?  if the code 
base you're building against doesnt supply socklen_t, it's a great big pile 
imo (this is after all required by POSIX).  if we want to support such crappy 
systems, we should move the socklen_t check into configure and have the 
source assume it's available.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/gpm/attachments/20080531/ca13d18d/attachment.pgp