This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Hello, I noticed that GDB failed trying to build clock.c in libiberty because the declaration of function "clock" in clock.c was conflicting with the declaration of "clock" in /usr/include/sys/time.h. Since libiberty is shared between GDB and GCC, presumably the same failure applies on GCC as well. libiberty's idea of clock: long clock (); HP/UX's idea of clock: clock_t clock(); Since "clock" is provided by the system, it seems that configure has incorrectly determined that the libiberty version of clock should be used. Basically, the sequence of events is the following: - configure tests for "clock" - gcc fails to compile the test program because the declaration used in the test program conflicts with the one provided by HP/UX. - So configure adds clock.c to the list of files to be included in libiberty - during the libiberty build, we fail while trying to build clock.c because of the same definition conflict. With an older version of autoconf (2.13), the little test application used to check for each function was slightly different (#included assert.h instead of now limits.h), and that caused the check for "clock" to be succesful. This configured libiberty to be built without clock.c. I'm not really sure how this should be fixed. Should it be fixed in autoconf for instance? Or should we use a custom test for "clock" in libiberty/configure.in? Or should we simply use the standard function check except on HP/UX were we know that "clock" is provided. I don't know autoconf that much, but it seems that trying to fix this problem may be a bit hard. So I took the simplest route, which was to skip the test for "clock" on HP/UX knowing that it's not necessary there. The downside of this approach is that it slightly increases the maintenance burden, but I think the increase should remain minimal. And it doesn't seem that this is the first time we do this sort of thing. Does the following patch look correct? Or should the problem be solved differently? 2003-09-03 J. Brobecker <brobecker@gnat.com> * configure.in: Skip the test for "clock" on HP/UX hosts. * configure: Regenerate. Thanks, -- Joel
Attachment:
libiberty.diff
Description: Text document
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |