Re: [PATCH] libtool -- don't print warnings with --silent

[Peter O'Gorman]

On 07/29/2011 07:55 PM, John David Anglin wrote:

Ping?


Hi Dave,

ltmain.sh is a generated file, so this patch is not correct. Perhaps 
something like (pasted in mail, so wrapped):


diff --git a/libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh b/libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh
index 9358ec5..bd5736c 100644
--- a/libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh
+++ b/libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh
@@ -377,9 +377,11 @@ M4SH_GETOPTS(
func_append preserve_args " $opt"],
   [],  [--silent|--quiet], [], [
func_append preserve_args " $opt"
+opt_warning=false
 opt_verbose=false],
   [v], [--verbose],[], [
func_append preserve_args " $opt"
+opt_warning=:
opt_silent=false],
   [!], [--tag],[], [
func_append preserve_args " $opt $optarg"

This turns off warnings for --silent (and turns them on again for 
--verbose).


But I am not sure that --silent was meant to imply "no warnings", rather 
it turns off the verbose compile/link messages.


Would a new --no-warnings option be more appropriate?

Peter



On 9-Jul-11, at 7:03 PM, John David Anglin wrote:


The attached patch fixes the boehm-gc testsuite on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11.
Without it, libtool always generates an informational warning when
linking
causing the entire boehm-gc testsuite to fail.

Ok? Ralf would you please install in libtool tree if ok.

2011-07-09 John David Anglin 

PR boehm-gc/48494
* ltmain.sh (func_warning): Don't print warnings if opt_silent is true.

Index: ltmain.sh
===
--- ltmain.sh (revision 176045)
+++ ltmain.sh (working copy)
@@ -437,7 +437,9 @@
# Echo program name prefixed warning message to standard error.
func_warning ()
{
- $opt_warning && $ECHO "$progname${mode+: }$mode: warning: "${1+"$@"}
1>&2
+ ${opt_silent-false} || {
+ $opt_warning && $ECHO "$progname${mode+: }$mode: warning: "${1+"$@"}
1>&2
+ }

# bash bug again:
:

Dave
--
J. David Anglin dave.ang...@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca
National Research Council of Canada (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6602)

AIX net/if_arp.h include fix for struct fc_softc

[Peter O'Gorman]

Hi,

We ran across an issue with qt-4.7 built with gcc-4.4 on AIX 5.2, 5.3,
6.1, and 7.1 where some static constructors were not being called. It
turned out to be a header file issue, see, for example,
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/forums/thread.jspa?threadID=211873&tstart=-2

Using fixincludes to fix the header allows us to build a working qt.

The erroneous struct declaration is:
struct  fc_softc {
struct arpcom   fc_ac;  /* FCS common part */
struct ndd*nddp;/* returned from NS*/
int(*efcnet_arp_fct)
 (struct ndd *, struct mbuf *); /* efcnet_arp function address */
} *fc_softc ;

when fixed it becomes:
typedef struct _fc_softc {   
struct arpcom   fc_ac;  /* FCS common part */
struct ndd*nddp;/* returned from NS*/
int(*efcnet_arp_fct)
 (struct ndd *, struct mbuf *); /* efcnet_arp function address */
} *fc_softc ;

David, do you have any idea if this is what it's supposed to be?

Ok for trunk?

Peter
-- 
Peter O'Gorman
po...@thewrittenword.com
Index: ChangeLog
===
--- ChangeLog   (revision 174678)
2011-??-??  Peter O'Gorman  

* inclhack.def (aix_net_if_arp): New fix.
* fixincl.x: Regenerate.
* tests/base/net/if_arp.h [AIX_NET_IF_ARP_CHECK]: New test.

Index: inclhack.def
===
--- inclhack.def(revision 174678)
+++ inclhack.def(working copy)
@@ -369,6 +369,19 @@
 test_text = "#define _Complex_I__I\n";
 };
 
+/*
+ * net/if_arp.h defines a variable fc_softc instead of adding a
+ * typedef for the struct on AIX 5.2, 5.3, 6.1 and 7.1
+ */
+fix = {
+hackname  = aix_net_if_arp;
+mach  = "*-*-aix*";
+files = "net/if_arp.h";
+select= "^struct  fc_softc \\{";
+c_fix = format;
+c_fix_arg = "typedef struct _fc_softc {";
+test_text = "struct  fc_softc {";
+};
 
 /*
  *  pthread.h on AIX 4.3.3 tries to define a macro without whitspace

Re: AIX net/if_arp.h include fix for struct fc_softc

[Peter O'Gorman]

On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 11:05:25AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
> > David, do you have any idea if this is what it's supposed to be?
> >
> > Ok for trunk?
> 
> The header certainly does not make sense as is and does not follow AIX
> header file conventions.  typedef is the only thing that makes sense,
> which was confirmed by some other AIX developer with whom I checked.
> (I would have expected fc_softc_t as well if it was intended as a
> typedef, but that's a separate issue.)
> 
> This change is okay.

Thanks, committed in r174707 with Bruce's change to the test.

> 
> I will try to find the AIX header owners to fix the problem as well.

That would be great.

Peter
-- 
Peter O'Gorman
po...@thewrittenword.com