> test-gettimeofday.c:23: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type
>
> It's because with _GNU_SOURCE, glibc declares the second argument of
> gettimeofday as a 'struct timezone *'.
Yuck. About the best I can think of is a configure-time check for the
ty
On Linux/glibc systems, I get this warning:
test-pty.c:24: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type
test-pty.c:26: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type
It's because glibc defines both forkpty and openpty with 'const' in the
last two parameters.
And also:
test-get
eMJ6K+Ux5G8JIbaO
620AnjQ58OitJ4DxscgSVJ6v7nhPTiWj
=x9T5
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
From 8ce83bb6c75b5bcc656da5fb94d5d84e066b231f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Eric Blake
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 12:00:23 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] test-nanosleep: fix typo
* tests/test-nanosleep.c (SIGNATURE_CHECK
Eric Blake wrote:
> I'm pushing this.
I get this gcc warning, on Linux/glibc:
test-nanosleep.c:24: warning: 'struct timepec' declared inside parameter list
test-nanosleep.c:24: warning: its scope is only this definition or declaration,
which is probably not what you want
test-nanosleep.c:24: war
Eric Blake wrote:
> According to Eric Blake on 12/23/2009 2:45 PM:
>>> Possibility 1: Put the SIGNATURE_CHECK into a file tests/signature.h, and
>>> put
>>> ASSERT, SIZEOF and a few others into tests/macros.h. A test looks like this:
>>>
>>
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Eric Blake on 12/23/2009 2:45 PM:
>> Possibility 1: Put the SIGNATURE_CHECK into a file tests/signature.h, and put
>> ASSERT, SIZEOF and a few others into tests/macros.h. A test looks like this:
>>
>
> It's l
Bruno Haible clisp.org> writes:
> So, how to resolve this contradicting requirements?
>
> Possibility 1: Put the SIGNATURE_CHECK into a file tests/signature.h, and put
> ASSERT, SIZEOF and a few others into tests/macros.h. A test looks like this:
>
>#incl
Hi Eric,
> that also means that test/macros.h must NOT include any system headers (so
> that
> SIGNATURE_CHECK can be invoked after config.h, macros.h, and exactly one
> system
> header has been included).
Thanks for stating this so clearly. Because on the other hand, I w
