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]

Re: Patch: Enforce -Werror during bootstrap


 > From: Zack Weinberg <zack@codesourcery.com>
 > 
 > "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> writes:
 > 
 > >
 > >  > # Number of warnings per file:
 > >  > #       4 insn-conditions.c
 > > (4x) insn-conditions.c:???: warning: string length `???' is greater than ...
 > > maybe fix-able, at worst bypass-able
 > 
 > It's generated code, used only by build utilities, and it's already
 > ugly, so we could get uglier if we wanted.  Or we could take this as
 > a hint to refactor some of the messy C tests in i386.md.
 > 
 > >  > #       3 gcc/tlink.c
 > > tlink.c didn't warn for me in a cross-config
 > 
 > tlink.c:600: warning: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false
 > tlink.c:616: warning: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false
 > tlink.c:655: warning: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false
 > 
 > >  > #       1 gcc/collect2.c
 > > collect2.c didn't warn for me in a cross-config.
 > 
 > collect2.c:516: warning: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false
 > 
 > Upon inspection, these are of the form
 > 
 > 516           if (!strncmp (p, USER_LABEL_PREFIX, strlen (USER_LABEL_PREFIX)))
 > 517             p += strlen (USER_LABEL_PREFIX);
 > 
 > which is running afoul of glibc's blasted string.h macros, which your
 > cross config does not have.  Off the top of my head I don't see an
 > easy, non-ugly, efficient fix.

Define __NO_STRING_INLINES in system.h?

--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]