From unknown Fri Jun 20 07:17:39 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#22087 <22087@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#22087 <22087@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with Studio C compiler. Reply-To: bug#22087 <22087@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 14:17:39 +0000 retitle 22087 Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with S= tudio C compiler. reassign 22087 coreutils submitter 22087 Rich Burridge severity 22087 normal thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 03 13:58:44 2015 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Dec 2015 18:58:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37778 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4Z5X-0006rs-FY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:58:43 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42001) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4Z5V-0006ri-5S for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:58:41 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4Z5U-0005H6-2J for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:58:40 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,URIBL_BLACK autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:34789) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4Z5T-0005Gx-WF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:58:40 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51949) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4Z5S-0005gQ-Kz for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:58:39 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4Z5L-00059m-6L for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:58:38 -0500 Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:28328) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a4Z5L-00058W-0M for bug-coreutils@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:58:31 -0500 Received: from aserv0022.oracle.com (aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id tB3IwS2A032303 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 18:58:28 GMT Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by aserv0022.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tB3IwSQS031824 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 18:58:28 GMT Received: from abhmp0006.oracle.com (abhmp0006.oracle.com [141.146.116.12]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tB3IwRq3022382 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 18:58:28 GMT Received: from [10.0.1.5] (/50.136.242.202) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 10:58:27 -0800 To: bug-coreutils@gnu.org From: Rich Burridge Subject: Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with Studio C compiler. Message-ID: <566090D2.7090008@oracle.com> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 10:58:26 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-IP: aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Hi, I'm finally getting around to integrating coreutils version 8.24 into Solaris 12 (and being built with the Studio C compiler rather than gcc) and noticed that the test for whether we had stdbuf was failing. I've fixed it with the following patch. Looks like gcc just doesn't trip over this, but hopefully the suggested change "just works" for both compilers. Thanks. $ cat configure.ac.patch The configure test for "whether this is system supports stdbuf" was failing because the warning: "conftest.c", line 731: warning: statement not reached was being turned into an error with the Studio C compiler (ignored with the GNU C compiler). We want to adjust the -errwarn option so that it ignores E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED errors. --- configure.ac.orig 2015-12-03 09:46:42.381111611 -0800 +++ configure.ac 2015-12-03 10:27:48.938546667 -0800 @@ -459,7 +459,7 @@ ac_save_LDFLAGS=$LDFLAGS # Detect warnings about ignored "constructor" attributes. gl_WARN_ADD([-Werror], [CFLAGS]) -gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn], [CFLAGS]) +gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn=no%E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED], [CFLAGS]) # Put this message here, after gl_WARN_ADD's chatter. AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether this system supports stdbuf]) CFLAGS="-fPIC $CFLAGS" From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 03 14:30:35 2015 Received: (at 22087) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Dec 2015 19:30:35 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37792 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4ZaM-0007yM-QL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 14:30:35 -0500 Received: from mail1.vodafone.ie ([213.233.128.43]:25989) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4Za0-0007f5-Jy for 22087@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 14:30:31 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ap8IAB2XYFZtTsUH/2dsb2JhbABegmlRHzRuvz4hhWoBAgKBTEwBAQEBAQGBC4Q1AQEEEhEPAVYLDQsCAgUWCwICCQMCAQIBRQYBDAgBAR6IEQmmQ4orhW2LDwELIYEBhFiFeId3gUQFlmGFLYozhxSTNWOCRIFAPjQBhW4BAQE Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) ([109.78.197.7]) by mail1.vodafone.ie with ESMTP; 03 Dec 2015 19:30:11 +0000 Subject: Re: bug#22087: Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with Studio C compiler. To: Rich Burridge , 22087@debbugs.gnu.org References: <566090D2.7090008@oracle.com> From: =?UTF-8?Q?P=c3=a1draig_Brady?= Message-ID: <56609842.9040304@draigBrady.com> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:30:10 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <566090D2.7090008@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On 03/12/15 18:58, Rich Burridge wrote: > Hi, > > I'm finally getting around to integrating coreutils version 8.24 > into Solaris 12 (and being built with the Studio C compiler rather > than gcc) and noticed that the test for whether we had stdbuf was > failing. > > I've fixed it with the following patch. Looks like gcc just doesn't > trip over this, but hopefully the suggested change "just works" for > both compilers. > > Thanks. > > > > $ cat configure.ac.patch > The configure test for "whether this is system supports stdbuf" was > failing because the warning: > > "conftest.c", line 731: warning: statement not reached > > was being turned into an error with the Studio C compiler (ignored > with the GNU C compiler). > > We want to adjust the -errwarn option so that it ignores > E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED errors. > > --- configure.ac.orig 2015-12-03 09:46:42.381111611 -0800 > +++ configure.ac 2015-12-03 10:27:48.938546667 -0800 > @@ -459, 7 +459, 7 @@ > ac_save_LDFLAGS=$LDFLAGS > # Detect warnings about ignored "constructor" attributes. > gl_WARN_ADD([-Werror], [CFLAGS]) > -gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn], [CFLAGS]) > +gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn=no%E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED], [CFLAGS]) > # Put this message here, after gl_WARN_ADD's chatter. > AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether this system supports stdbuf]) > CFLAGS="-fPIC $CFLAGS" [...] Content analysis details: (1.7 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [213.233.128.43 listed in list.dnswl.org] 1.7 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [URIs: configure.ac] X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22087 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On 03/12/15 18:58, Rich Burridge wrote: > Hi, > > I'm finally getting around to integrating coreutils version 8.24 > into Solaris 12 (and being built with the Studio C compiler rather > than gcc) and noticed that the test for whether we had stdbuf was > failing. > > I've fixed it with the following patch. Looks like gcc just doesn't > trip over this, but hopefully the suggested change "just works" for > both compilers. > > Thanks. > > > > $ cat configure.ac.patch > The configure test for "whether this is system supports stdbuf" was > failing because the warning: > > "conftest.c", line 731: warning: statement not reached > > was being turned into an error with the Studio C compiler (ignored > with the GNU C compiler). > > We want to adjust the -errwarn option so that it ignores > E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED errors. > > --- configure.ac.orig 2015-12-03 09:46:42.381111611 -0800 > +++ configure.ac 2015-12-03 10:27:48.938546667 -0800 > @@ -459,7 +459,7 @@ > ac_save_LDFLAGS=$LDFLAGS > # Detect warnings about ignored "constructor" attributes. > gl_WARN_ADD([-Werror], [CFLAGS]) > -gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn], [CFLAGS]) > +gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn=no%E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED], [CFLAGS]) > # Put this message here, after gl_WARN_ADD's chatter. > AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether this system supports stdbuf]) > CFLAGS="-fPIC $CFLAGS" [...] Content analysis details: (1.7 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [213.233.128.43 listed in list.dnswl.org] 1.7 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [URIs: configure.ac] On 03/12/15 18:58, Rich Burridge wrote: > Hi, > > I'm finally getting around to integrating coreutils version 8.24 > into Solaris 12 (and being built with the Studio C compiler rather > than gcc) and noticed that the test for whether we had stdbuf was > failing. > > I've fixed it with the following patch. Looks like gcc just doesn't > trip over this, but hopefully the suggested change "just works" for > both compilers. > > Thanks. > > > > $ cat configure.ac.patch > The configure test for "whether this is system supports stdbuf" was > failing because the warning: > > "conftest.c", line 731: warning: statement not reached > > was being turned into an error with the Studio C compiler (ignored > with the GNU C compiler). > > We want to adjust the -errwarn option so that it ignores > E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED errors. > > --- configure.ac.orig 2015-12-03 09:46:42.381111611 -0800 > +++ configure.ac 2015-12-03 10:27:48.938546667 -0800 > @@ -459,7 +459,7 @@ > ac_save_LDFLAGS=$LDFLAGS > # Detect warnings about ignored "constructor" attributes. > gl_WARN_ADD([-Werror], [CFLAGS]) > -gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn], [CFLAGS]) > +gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn=no%E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED], [CFLAGS]) > # Put this message here, after gl_WARN_ADD's chatter. > AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether this system supports stdbuf]) > CFLAGS="-fPIC $CFLAGS" which statement isn't reached? I presume it's a false positive from the compiler? -errwarn was added to support AIX: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20733#112 I'm worried that we may break that. Would it still work for you to add in addition? I.E. +gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn=no%E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED], [CFLAGS]) in addition to the existing -errwarn? cheers, Pádraig From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 03 14:43:23 2015 Received: (at 22087) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Dec 2015 19:43:23 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37816 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4Zml-00016q-CC for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 14:43:23 -0500 Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:21285) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4ZmQ-00016J-Uy for 22087@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 14:43:22 -0500 Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id tB3Jh1fd025538 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:43:01 GMT Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tB3Jh1EY020460 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:43:01 GMT Received: from abhmp0010.oracle.com (abhmp0010.oracle.com [141.146.116.16]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tB3Jh0gt014488; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 19:43:00 GMT Received: from [10.0.1.5] (/50.136.242.202) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 11:43:00 -0800 Subject: Re: bug#22087: Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with Studio C compiler. To: =?UTF-8?Q?P=c3=a1draig_Brady?= , 22087@debbugs.gnu.org References: <566090D2.7090008@oracle.com> <56609842.9040304@draigBrady.com> From: Rich Burridge Message-ID: <56609B43.7010409@oracle.com> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 11:42:59 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56609842.9040304@draigBrady.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22087 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) On 12/03/2015 11:30 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote: > On 03/12/15 18:58, Rich Burridge wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm finally getting around to integrating coreutils version 8.24 >> into Solaris 12 (and being built with the Studio C compiler rather >> than gcc) and noticed that the test for whether we had stdbuf was >> failing. >> >> I've fixed it with the following patch. Looks like gcc just doesn't >> trip over this, but hopefully the suggested change "just works" for >> both compilers. >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> >> $ cat configure.ac.patch >> The configure test for "whether this is system supports stdbuf" was >> failing because the warning: >> >> "conftest.c", line 731: warning: statement not reached >> >> was being turned into an error with the Studio C compiler (ignored >> with the GNU C compiler). >> >> We want to adjust the -errwarn option so that it ignores >> E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED errors. >> >> --- configure.ac.orig 2015-12-03 09:46:42.381111611 -0800 >> +++ configure.ac 2015-12-03 10:27:48.938546667 -0800 >> @@ -459,7 +459,7 @@ >> ac_save_LDFLAGS=$LDFLAGS >> # Detect warnings about ignored "constructor" attributes. >> gl_WARN_ADD([-Werror], [CFLAGS]) >> -gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn], [CFLAGS]) >> +gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn=no%E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED], [CFLAGS]) >> # Put this message here, after gl_WARN_ADD's chatter. >> AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether this system supports stdbuf]) >> CFLAGS="-fPIC $CFLAGS" > which statement isn't reached? > I presume it's a false positive from the compiler? I isolated it into the following small conftest.c program: 1 static int stdbuf = 0; 2 3 void __attribute__ ((constructor)) 4 stdbuf_init (void) 5 { 6 stdbuf = 1; 7 } 8 int 9 main () 10 { 11 12 return !(stdbuf == 1); 13 ; 14 return 0; 15 } 16 and that fails with: $ cc -o conftest -errwarn conftest.c "conftest.c", line 14: statement not reached cc: acomp failed for conftest.c > -errwarn was added to support AIX: > http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20733#112 > I'm worried that we may break that. > Would it still work for you to add in addition? I.E. > > +gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn=no%E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED], [CFLAGS]) > > in addition to the existing -errwarn? Yes, that works nicely. My patch is now: --- configure.ac.orig 2015-12-03 09:46:42.381111611 -0800 +++ configure.ac 2015-12-03 11:38:42.733910645 -0800 @@ -460,6 +460,7 @@ # Detect warnings about ignored "constructor" attributes. gl_WARN_ADD([-Werror], [CFLAGS]) gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn], [CFLAGS]) +gl_WARN_ADD([-errwarn=no%E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED], [CFLAGS]) # Put this message here, after gl_WARN_ADD's chatter. AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether this system supports stdbuf]) CFLAGS="-fPIC $CFLAGS" Thanks. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 03 15:04:40 2015 Received: (at 22087) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Dec 2015 20:04:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37824 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4a7M-0001bS-6S for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 15:04:40 -0500 Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:55613) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4a7K-0001bK-Bm for 22087@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 15:04:39 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51E03160743; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 12:04:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id E2sLWNGMwQNi; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 12:04:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44CF9160D7D; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 12:04:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 9AQhfpIgLh2f; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 12:04:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from Penguin.CS.UCLA.EDU (Penguin.CS.UCLA.EDU [131.179.64.200]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 28C52160743; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 12:04:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: bug#22087: Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with Studio C compiler. To: Rich Burridge , =?UTF-8?Q?P=c3=a1draig_Brady?= , 22087@debbugs.gnu.org References: <566090D2.7090008@oracle.com> <56609842.9040304@draigBrady.com> <56609B43.7010409@oracle.com> From: Paul Eggert Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <5660A053.5090602@cs.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 12:04:35 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56609B43.7010409@oracle.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------010806070903040306030003" X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: How about the attached (untested) patch instead? It should fix the underlying problem, and thus avoid the need for fiddling with compiler flags. diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index 66c8cbe..3f546e9 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ AC_LINK_IFELSE( { stdbuf = 1; }]],[[ - return !(stdbuf == 1);]]) + if (stdbuf != 1) + return 1;]]) ], [stdbuf_supported=yes]) AC_MSG_RESULT([$stdbuf_supported]) [...] Content analysis details: (1.7 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.7 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [URIs: configure.ac] X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22087 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: How about the attached (untested) patch instead? It should fix the underlying problem, and thus avoid the need for fiddling with compiler flags. diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index 66c8cbe..3f546e9 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ AC_LINK_IFELSE( { stdbuf = 1; }]],[[ - return !(stdbuf == 1);]]) + if (stdbuf != 1) + return 1;]]) ], [stdbuf_supported=yes]) AC_MSG_RESULT([$stdbuf_supported]) [...] Content analysis details: (1.7 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.7 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [URIs: configure.ac] -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010806070903040306030003 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit How about the attached (untested) patch instead? It should fix the underlying problem, and thus avoid the need for fiddling with compiler flags. --------------010806070903040306030003 Content-Type: text/x-patch; name="t.diff" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="t.diff" diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index 66c8cbe..3f546e9 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ AC_LINK_IFELSE( { stdbuf = 1; }]],[[ - return !(stdbuf == 1);]]) + if (stdbuf != 1) + return 1;]]) ], [stdbuf_supported=yes]) AC_MSG_RESULT([$stdbuf_supported]) --------------010806070903040306030003-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 03 16:02:53 2015 Received: (at 22087) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Dec 2015 21:02:53 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37842 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4b1g-0002y5-Lf for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:02:52 -0500 Received: from havoc.proulx.com ([96.88.95.61]:37051) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4b1M-0002xd-1y for 22087@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:02:50 -0500 Received: from joseki.proulx.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by havoc.proulx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18880C60; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:02:31 -0700 (MST) Received: from hysteria.proulx.com (hysteria.proulx.com [192.168.230.119]) by joseki.proulx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B051C21891; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:02:30 -0700 (MST) Received: by hysteria.proulx.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9D82F2DC51; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:02:30 -0700 (MST) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:02:30 -0700 From: Bob Proulx To: Paul Eggert Subject: Re: bug#22087: Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with Studio C compiler. Message-ID: <20151203135857834642206@bob.proulx.com> References: <566090D2.7090008@oracle.com> <56609842.9040304@draigBrady.com> <56609B43.7010409@oracle.com> <5660A053.5090602@cs.ucla.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5660A053.5090602@cs.ucla.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Paul Eggert wrote: > How about the attached (untested) patch instead? It should fix the > underlying problem, and thus avoid the need for fiddling with compiler > flags. > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac > index 66c8cbe..3f546e9 100644 > --- a/configure.ac > +++ b/configure.ac > @@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ AC_LINK_IFELSE( > { > stdbuf = 1; > }]],[[ > - return !(stdbuf == 1); ]]) > + if (stdbuf != 1) > + return 1; ]]) > ], > [stdbuf_supported=yes]) > AC_MSG_RESULT([$stdbuf_supported]) [...] Content analysis details: (1.7 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.7 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [URIs: configure.ac] X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22087 Cc: 22087@debbugs.gnu.org, Rich Burridge X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Paul Eggert wrote: > How about the attached (untested) patch instead? It should fix the > underlying problem, and thus avoid the need for fiddling with compiler > flags. > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac > index 66c8cbe..3f546e9 100644 > --- a/configure.ac > +++ b/configure.ac > @@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ AC_LINK_IFELSE( > { > stdbuf = 1; > }]],[[ > - return !(stdbuf == 1);]]) > + if (stdbuf != 1) > + return 1;]]) > ], > [stdbuf_supported=yes]) > AC_MSG_RESULT([$stdbuf_supported]) [...] Content analysis details: (1.7 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.7 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [URIs: configure.ac] -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record Paul Eggert wrote: > How about the attached (untested) patch instead? It should fix the > underlying problem, and thus avoid the need for fiddling with compiler > flags. > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac > index 66c8cbe..3f546e9 100644 > --- a/configure.ac > +++ b/configure.ac > @@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ AC_LINK_IFELSE( > { > stdbuf = 1; > }]],[[ > - return !(stdbuf == 1);]]) > + if (stdbuf != 1) > + return 1;]]) > ], > [stdbuf_supported=yes]) > AC_MSG_RESULT([$stdbuf_supported]) Fallthrough return 0? Or is a return 0 already defaulted? It stood out to me that the previous return was unconditional and without an else or a fallthrough this is a change from the previous control flow. - return !(stdbuf == 1);]]) + if (stdbuf != 1) + return 1; + return 0;]]) ?? Bob From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 03 16:07:31 2015 Received: (at 22087) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Dec 2015 21:07:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37846 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4b6B-00034h-Eb for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:07:31 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39936) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4b68-00034Y-LM for 22087@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:07:29 -0500 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AE97642E5D6; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 21:07:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.3.113.81] (ovpn-113-81.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.81]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id tB3L7RQO014838; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 16:07:27 -0500 Subject: Re: bug#22087: Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with Studio C compiler. To: Bob Proulx , Paul Eggert References: <566090D2.7090008@oracle.com> <56609842.9040304@draigBrady.com> <56609B43.7010409@oracle.com> <5660A053.5090602@cs.ucla.edu> <20151203135857834642206@bob.proulx.com> From: Eric Blake Openpgp: url=http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Organization: Red Hat, Inc. Message-ID: <5660AF0A.4080500@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:07:22 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151203135857834642206@bob.proulx.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="62Ieo8esPFrEe42NgST7jMDQRxkQOjwl7" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.27 X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22087 Cc: 22087@debbugs.gnu.org, Rich Burridge X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --62Ieo8esPFrEe42NgST7jMDQRxkQOjwl7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 12/03/2015 02:02 PM, Bob Proulx wrote: > Paul Eggert wrote: >> How about the attached (untested) patch instead? It should fix the >> underlying problem, and thus avoid the need for fiddling with compiler= >> flags. >=20 >> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac >> index 66c8cbe..3f546e9 100644 >> --- a/configure.ac >> +++ b/configure.ac >> @@ -475,7 +475,8 @@ AC_LINK_IFELSE( >> { >> stdbuf =3D 1; >> }]],[[ >> - return !(stdbuf =3D=3D 1);]]) >> + if (stdbuf !=3D 1) >> + return 1;]]) >> ], >> [stdbuf_supported=3Dyes]) >> AC_MSG_RESULT([$stdbuf_supported]) >=20 > Fallthrough return 0? Yes, autoconf's AC_LINK_IFELSE provides an automatic 'return 0;' after anything you supply in your macro arguments, when it builds conftest.c. > Or is a return 0 already defaulted? It stood > out to me that the previous return was unconditional and without an > else or a fallthrough this is a change from the previous control flow. >=20 > - return !(stdbuf =3D=3D 1);]]) > + if (stdbuf !=3D 1) > + return 1; > + return 0;]]) Explicitly listing 'return 0;' here would result in a doubled-up return 0 in the overall conftest.c file. --=20 Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org --62Ieo8esPFrEe42NgST7jMDQRxkQOjwl7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWYK8KAAoJEKeha0olJ0NqzM0H/1V0kGCFmyRpLGDOq4vSiP17 MdPKcuzUjQttNfVZEdsH9E2k0YGNmBtuuaFaeIfEpwK/bGX3rVWla5Y44OxAI27H p+Tsq1EAsg0ZLDMLPnlpmtTEenQCpqo68Ve1WZuWi6LUT8STDxSkRyCzOlW1554X LEjcRXygB7Hbs1DQGjs1XHmMel6ghijUyPw6vP6DAUeSDKRjvTFBpJ/4YwbPdtMT qEZGX2U045OR1iqXQTt6K2fe0PQiXYGrHEMic7+8bSZHuIt98MdSyMpkjBWQTde/ 2rzr5nSAH5oQ2+3Ez+bpmINa7kWVcVL7ai81l3zc5l5S+fFX/z+YWWPsI9J6QEg= =+QzI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --62Ieo8esPFrEe42NgST7jMDQRxkQOjwl7-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 03 16:08:43 2015 Received: (at 22087) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Dec 2015 21:08:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37850 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4b7K-00036T-Ty for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:08:43 -0500 Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:49390) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4b7I-00036K-LW for 22087@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:08:41 -0500 Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id tB3L8cVW006712 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 3 Dec 2015 21:08:39 GMT Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tB3L8cSC030951 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 3 Dec 2015 21:08:38 GMT Received: from abhmp0012.oracle.com (abhmp0012.oracle.com [141.146.116.18]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tB3L8cac029290; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 21:08:38 GMT Received: from [10.0.1.5] (/50.136.242.202) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:08:38 -0800 Subject: Re: bug#22087: Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with Studio C compiler. To: Paul Eggert , =?UTF-8?Q?P=c3=a1draig_Brady?= , 22087@debbugs.gnu.org References: <566090D2.7090008@oracle.com> <56609842.9040304@draigBrady.com> <56609B43.7010409@oracle.com> <5660A053.5090602@cs.ucla.edu> From: Rich Burridge Message-ID: <5660AF55.2020505@oracle.com> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:08:37 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5660A053.5090602@cs.ucla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22087 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) On 12/03/2015 12:04 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: > How about the attached (untested) patch instead? It should fix the > underlying problem, and thus avoid the need for fiddling with compiler > flags. Yup. That works nicely too. Thanks. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 03 16:09:35 2015 Received: (at 22087) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Dec 2015 21:09:35 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37854 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4b8B-00037x-9Z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:09:35 -0500 Received: from havoc.proulx.com ([96.88.95.61]:37080) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4b89-00037q-Vf for 22087@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:09:34 -0500 Received: from joseki.proulx.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by havoc.proulx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8564F528; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:09:33 -0700 (MST) Received: from hysteria.proulx.com (hysteria.proulx.com [192.168.230.119]) by joseki.proulx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FAFD21891; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:09:33 -0700 (MST) Received: by hysteria.proulx.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F014E2DC51; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:09:32 -0700 (MST) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:09:32 -0700 From: Bob Proulx To: 22087@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#22087: Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with Studio C compiler. Message-ID: <20151203140816194678564@bob.proulx.com> References: <566090D2.7090008@oracle.com> <56609842.9040304@draigBrady.com> <56609B43.7010409@oracle.com> <5660A053.5090602@cs.ucla.edu> <20151203135857834642206@bob.proulx.com> <5660AF0A.4080500@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5660AF0A.4080500@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22087 Cc: Paul Eggert , Rich Burridge X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) Eric Blake wrote: > Bob Proulx wrote: > > Or is a return 0 already defaulted? It stood out to me that the > > previous return was unconditional and without an else or a > > fallthrough this is a change from the previous control flow. > > > > - return !(stdbuf == 1);]]) > > + if (stdbuf != 1) > > + return 1; > > + return 0;]]) > > Explicitly listing 'return 0;' here would result in a doubled-up return > 0 in the overall conftest.c file. Gotcha! That there is already a default return 0 answers my question. Thanks, Bob From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 03 16:57:51 2015 Received: (at 22087-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Dec 2015 21:57:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37870 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4bst-0004Dg-0Q for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:57:51 -0500 Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:57187) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a4bsq-0004DX-5O for 22087-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2015 16:57:49 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17B9F160D7D; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:57:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id c_J8VeSkCFhU; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:57:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE312160E02; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:57:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id AQsbTDccNHQZ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:57:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from Penguin.CS.UCLA.EDU (Penguin.CS.UCLA.EDU [131.179.64.200]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1101160D7D; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:57:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: bug#22087: Problem with stdbuf configure test for 8.24 on Solaris with Studio C compiler. To: Rich Burridge , =?UTF-8?Q?P=c3=a1draig_Brady?= , 22087-done@debbugs.gnu.org References: <566090D2.7090008@oracle.com> <56609842.9040304@draigBrady.com> <56609B43.7010409@oracle.com> <5660A053.5090602@cs.ucla.edu> <5660AF55.2020505@oracle.com> From: Paul Eggert Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <5660BAD9.2040804@cs.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:57:45 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5660AF55.2020505@oracle.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------000100080204000807070903" X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On 12/03/2015 01:08 PM, Rich Burridge wrote: > Yup. That works nicely too. Thanks, I noticed a similar problem in three other places (which I guess don't affect your platform) and so installed the attached more-general patch. [...] Content analysis details: (1.7 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.7 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [URIs: configure.ac] -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 22087-done X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On 12/03/2015 01:08 PM, Rich Burridge wrote: > Yup. That works nicely too. Thanks, I noticed a similar problem in three other places (which I guess don't affect your platform) and so installed the attached more-general patch. [...] Content analysis details: (1.7 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 1.7 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist [URIs: configure.ac] -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000100080204000807070903 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/03/2015 01:08 PM, Rich Burridge wrote: > Yup. That works nicely too. Thanks, I noticed a similar problem in three other places (which I guess don't affect your platform) and so installed the attached more-general patch. --------------000100080204000807070903 Content-Type: text/x-patch; name="0001-build-port-to-Studio-C-on-Solaris-12.patch" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="0001-build-port-to-Studio-C-on-Solaris-12.patch" >From c536d89fc497f90464de61c5b4207d103dfbad08 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Eggert Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:55:44 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] build: port to Studio C on Solaris 12 Reported by Rich Burridge in: http://bugs.gnu.org/22087 * configure.ac (HAVE_UT_HOST, HAVE_C_LINE, stdbuf): Pacify picky compilers that complain about unreachable statements. --- configure.ac | 21 ++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index 66c8cbe..a5c4e41 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -354,7 +354,9 @@ coreutils_DUMMY_1 AC_MSG_CHECKING([ut_host in struct utmp]) AC_CACHE_VAL([su_cv_func_ut_host_in_utmp], [AC_LINK_IFELSE([AC_LANG_PROGRAM([[#include -#include ]], [[struct utmp ut; return !sizeof ut.ut_host;]])], + #include + struct utmp ut; + int s = sizeof ut.ut_host;]])], [su_cv_func_ut_host_in_utmp=yes], [su_cv_func_ut_host_in_utmp=no])]) AC_MSG_RESULT([$su_cv_func_ut_host_in_utmp]) @@ -367,7 +369,9 @@ if test -z "$have_ut_host"; then AC_MSG_CHECKING([ut_host in struct utmpx]) AC_CACHE_VAL([su_cv_func_ut_host_in_utmpx], [AC_LINK_IFELSE([AC_LANG_PROGRAM([[#include -#include ]], [[struct utmpx ut; return !sizeof ut.ut_host;]])], + #include + struct utmpx ut; + int s = sizeof ut.ut_host;]])], [su_cv_func_ut_host_in_utmpx=yes], [su_cv_func_ut_host_in_utmpx=no])]) AC_MSG_RESULT([$su_cv_func_ut_host_in_utmpx]) @@ -404,10 +408,12 @@ yes AC_MSG_CHECKING([c_line in struct termios]) AC_CACHE_VAL([su_cv_sys_c_line_in_termios], [AC_LINK_IFELSE([AC_LANG_PROGRAM([[#if TERMIOS_NEEDS_XOPEN_SOURCE -#define _XOPEN_SOURCE -#endif -#include -#include ]], [[struct termios t; return !sizeof t.c_line;]])], + #define _XOPEN_SOURCE + #endif + #include + #include + struct termios t; + int s = sizeof t.c_line;]])], [su_cv_sys_c_line_in_termios=yes], [su_cv_sys_c_line_in_termios=no])]) AC_MSG_RESULT([$su_cv_sys_c_line_in_termios]) @@ -475,7 +481,8 @@ AC_LINK_IFELSE( { stdbuf = 1; }]],[[ - return !(stdbuf == 1);]]) + if (stdbuf != 1) + return 1;]]) ], [stdbuf_supported=yes]) AC_MSG_RESULT([$stdbuf_supported]) -- 2.1.0 --------------000100080204000807070903-- From unknown Fri Jun 20 07:17:39 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2016 12:24:04 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator