[PATCH 2/2] memrchr-tests: pacify GCC

Pacify GCC 11.1.1 20210531 (Red Hat 11.1.1-3) x86-64. * tests/test-memrchr.c: Disable -Wmaybe-uninitialized. --- ChangeLog| 4 tests/test-memrchr.c | 5 + 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog index 1caabff62..c50808437 100644 --- a/ChangeLog +++

[PATCH 1/2] explicit_bzero-tests: pacify GCC

Redo to pacify -Wmaybe-uninitialized with GCC 11.1.1 20210531 (Red Hat 11.1.1-3) x86-64. * tests/test-explicit_bzero.c (stackbuf): New static pointer. (do_secret_stuff): Use it. (test_stack): Set it to a local buffer. --- ChangeLog | 7 +++ tests/test-explicit_bzero.c | 8 +++

[PATCH] posixtm: pacify latest GCC

Also, modernize while I’m at it. * lib/posixtm.c: Include c-ctype.h, idx.h, intprops.h, verify.h instead of stdlib.h. (ISDIGIT): Remove. All uses replaced by c_isdigit. (year, posix_time_parse): Prefer idx_t to size_t. Use assume instead of abort. (posixtime): Do not parse twice; once is enough.

Re: Undefined use of weak symbols in gnulib

Hi Florian, > > 1) I understand that it's only for glibc >= 2.34 on Linux (NPTL), > >right? Not on Hurd (HTL)? > > Yes, Hurd hasn't been integrated. > > > 2) /usr/include/gnu/lib-names.h still defines LIBPTHREAD_SO. > >How about not defining LIBPTHREAD_SO, since linking with it is suppos

Re: Undefined use of weak symbols in gnulib

Florian Weimer wrote on 2021-04-28: > However, you should really remove those weak symbol > hacks. They won't have any effect for glibc 2.34 Done as follows. Tested on a Fedora Rawhide from today. Thanks for the suggestion. 2021-07-17 Bruno Haible Don't use '#pragma weak' for thread

Fix cross-compilation test results

Before testing __GNU_LIBRARY__, one has to include either (which only exists on glibc, musl, Android, and Cygwin systems) or some header file such as or . 2021-07-17 Bruno Haible Fix cross-compilation test results. * m4/memmem.m4 (gl_FUNC_MEMMEM_SIMPLE): When cross-compiling

Re: Undefined use of weak symbols in gnulib

* Bruno Haible: > Florian Weimer wrote on 2021-04-28: >> However, you should really remove those weak symbol >> hacks. They won't have any effect for glibc 2.34 > > I'm trying to do this now. But what is the right condition? > > 1) I understand that it's only for glibc >= 2.34 on Linux (NPTL), >

Re: Undefined use of weak symbols in gnulib

Florian Weimer wrote on 2021-04-28: > However, you should really remove those weak symbol > hacks. They won't have any effect for glibc 2.34 I'm trying to do this now. But what is the right condition? 1) I understand that it's only for glibc >= 2.34 on Linux (NPTL), right? Not on Hurd (HTL)?