Hi! On Mon, 2023-06-05 at 21:18:10 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > Package: dpkg-dev > Version: 1.21.22 > Tags: patch > User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com > Usertags: origin-ubuntu mantic patch
> The discussion on debian-devel around 64-bit time_t has died down, so I > figure it's time to propose some patches to implement what's been discussed > there. Yeah, I'm not sure whether it has died off or it's just being slow. > I'm not sure whether you were persuaded that i386 should stay with the > current ABI, but anyway thought I would propose the patches and we could > discuss further if necessary. In any case I've tried to reply there. Also my impression was that there was still some analysis pending (perhaps that was a wrong impression though)? Thanks for the patches! > From 5a861d19b1610ae82bf95e6c5142a3365436fbd2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Steve Langasek <steve.langa...@ubuntu.com> > Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2023 14:30:20 +0000 > Subject: [PATCH 1/3] lfs and time64 are no longer "future", call them > "feature" instead > Ah, I actually had implemented locally the alias with your original suggestion of "abi"! :) Using "feature" here seems would be rather more confusing as these are called feature flags, and feature areas. I'll try to push the stuff I've got queued locally during the weekend, then I can rebase these patches on a branch or similar. > From 7eff8f89b32b6921a0d86c50c6c62154c6ddc96e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Steve Langasek <steve.langa...@ubuntu.com> > Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2023 16:30:19 +0000 > Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Also emit -Werror=implicit-function-declaration for > feature=+time64 > > Per https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2023/05/msg00262.html et al., > missing glibc includes can cause packages to link to the wrong symbols, > potentially causing crashes or misbehavior. Since functions that use > time_t are fairly ubiquitous, there's a high risk of this happening for > *some* package in Debian. Better to make all software with missing > function declarations fail to build now, than to spend all cycle tracking > down runtime bugs. > --- > scripts/Dpkg/Vendor/Debian.pm | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/scripts/Dpkg/Vendor/Debian.pm b/scripts/Dpkg/Vendor/Debian.pm > index 20d77fea1..803949024 100644 > --- a/scripts/Dpkg/Vendor/Debian.pm > +++ b/scripts/Dpkg/Vendor/Debian.pm > @@ -400,6 +400,8 @@ sub _add_build_flags { > > if ($flags->use_feature('feature', 'time64')) { > $flags->append('CPPFLAGS', '-D_TIME_BITS=64'); > + $flags->append('CFLAGS', '-Werror=implicit-function-declaration'); > + $flags->append('CXXFLAGS', '-Werror=implicit-function-declaration'); > } I'm not sure I like intermingling the different semantics here, if necessary I'd rather make time64 forcibly enable another feature flag, like it is done for lfs. As I mentioned on the recent thread about the modern C stuff, I do have a branch that adds these as part of a new qa=+c99 feature, but that's too broad. :/ <https://git.hadrons.org/git/debian/dpkg/dpkg.git/commit/?h=next/modern-c&id=3316845bf415436299d61501db655fd2c1813436> Maybe I could add a new feature area instead and add the flags individually, and then make time64 also enable that other specific feature. Hmmm. Thanks, Guillem
