[Nut-upsdev] minor building issues (svn HEAD revision 427)

[Niels Baggesen]

On Sat, May 20, 2006 at 10:10:33AM -0400, Charles Lepple wrote:
> They may be defining setenv for the same reason NUT is - to add a
> function that the OS left out - and so it isn't really part of the
> package proper.

Exactly, I can say for sure (being a committer on both nut and net-snmp)

The problem both here and there is that the linker is not able to skip
those duplicate definitions.

/Niels

-- 
Niels Baggesen - @home - Århus - Denmark - nba at users.sourceforge.net
The purpose of computing is insight, not numbers   ---   R W Hamming