On 2019-03-01 23:00, Kern Sibbald wrote:
Hello,
I am quite surprised that the static function did not take precedence.
In any case, I have changed the subroutine name to be bround(), and
will
push it to the git rep this evening.
Thanks for pointing this out,
Kern
I agree, it's strange that the "static" didn't hide it, but the G++
developers often do strange things.
Anyway, as threatened, here are my results building with the Solaris
Developer Studio C++ compiler:
Using Developer Studio 12.6.
Firstly, the code compiles much more quietly than previously, the recent
clean-up has certainly improved things.
And the problem with "round()" did not happen...
Sections are divided by lines of ='s.
==================================================================
This warning is repeated for every file that includes src/config.h.
Compiling attr.c
/src/bacula/bacula-9.4.2/libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile
/opt/developerstudio12.6/bin/CC -c -I. -I.. -g -O -m64 attr.c
libtool: compile: /opt/developerstudio12.6/bin/CC -c -I. -I.. -g -O
-m64 attr.c -KPIC -DPIC -o .libs/attr.o
"../config.h", line 1266: Warning (Anachronism): Attempt to redefine
__restrict__ without using #undef.
1 Warning(s) detected.
Examining the source, it is for a very old version of the Solaris C++
compiler, I would suggest changing lines 1255-1266 in
autoconf/config.h.in:
$ diff -c original-bacula-9.4.2/autoconf/config.h.in
bacula-9.4.2/autoconf/config.h.in
*** original-bacula-9.4.2/autoconf/config.h.in Mon Mar 4 18:06:07 2019
--- bacula-9.4.2/autoconf/config.h.in Mon Mar 4 18:11:18 2019
***************
*** 1255,1266 ****
nothing if this is not supported. Do not define if restrict is
supported directly. */
#undef restrict
! /* Work around a bug in Sun C++: it does not support _Restrict or
__restrict__, even though the corresponding Sun C compiler ends up
with
"#define restrict _Restrict" or "#define restrict __restrict__" in
the
previous line. Perhaps some future version of Sun C++ will work
with
restrict; if so, hopefully it defines __RESTRICT like Sun C does.
*/
! #if defined __SUNPRO_CC && !defined __RESTRICT
# define _Restrict
# define __restrict__
#endif
--- 1255,1266 ----
nothing if this is not supported. Do not define if restrict is
supported directly. */
#undef restrict
! /* Work around a bug in old Sun C++: it does not support _Restrict or
__restrict__, even though the corresponding Sun C compiler ends up
with
"#define restrict _Restrict" or "#define restrict __restrict__" in
the
previous line. Perhaps some future version of Sun C++ will work
with
restrict; if so, hopefully it defines __RESTRICT like Sun C does.
*/
! #if defined __SUNPRO_CC && __SUNPRO_CC < 0x5150
# define _Restrict
# define __restrict__
#endif
This behaviour probably changed in Sun C++ several versions ago, but the
noise generated prior to the recent clean-up masked it.
==================================================================
After applying the above change, things get a lot quieter!
Subsequent warnings fall into two basic groups.
==================================================================
Group 1:
"../baconfig.h", line 64: Warning: Likely null pointer dereference
(*(((char *)0)[0])): bRC_BXATTR BXATTR::serialize_xattr_stream
This looks like old C code used to cause a segmentation violation when
something has gone wrong.
I wonder why "abort()" was/is not used?
What happens if you replace the assignments like "tjcr[0] = 0;" with
"abort();"????
The code compiles, but does it still do what is expected?? (Yes, I am
sure that it does, and some of the lines are even documented with
"generate segmentation violation" but just because I'm paranoid it
doesn't mean they aren't out to get me!)
There are three files affected:
src/baconfig.h
src/lib/lockmgr.c
src/lib/message.c
$ diff -c -r original-bacula-9.4.2/src/baconfig.h
bacula-9.4.2/src/baconfig.h
*** original-bacula-9.4.2/src/baconfig.h Tue Feb 5 03:47:31 2019
--- bacula-9.4.2/src/baconfig.h Mon Mar 4 17:15:58 2019
***************
*** 61,67 ****
char *tjcr = NULL; \
Emsg1(M_ERROR, 0, _("Failed ASSERT: %s\n"), #x); \
Pmsg1(000, _("Failed ASSERT: %s\n"), #x); \
! tjcr[0] = 0; }
#define ASSERT2(x,y) if (!(x)) { \
set_assert_msg(__FILE__, __LINE__, y); \
--- 61,67 ----
char *tjcr = NULL; \
Emsg1(M_ERROR, 0, _("Failed ASSERT: %s\n"), #x); \
Pmsg1(000, _("Failed ASSERT: %s\n"), #x); \
! abort(); }
#define ASSERT2(x,y) if (!(x)) { \
set_assert_msg(__FILE__, __LINE__, y); \
***************
*** 68,74 ****
Emsg1(M_ERROR, 0, _("Failed ASSERT: %s\n"), #x); \
Pmsg1(000, _("Failed ASSERT: %s\n"), #x); \
char *tjcr = NULL; \
! tjcr[0] = 0; }
#else
#define ASSERT(x)
#define ASSERT2(x, y)
--- 68,74 ----
Emsg1(M_ERROR, 0, _("Failed ASSERT: %s\n"), #x); \
Pmsg1(000, _("Failed ASSERT: %s\n"), #x); \
char *tjcr = NULL; \
! abort(); }
#else
#define ASSERT(x)
#define ASSERT2(x, y)
$ diff -c -r original-bacula-9.4.2/src/lib/lockmgr.c
bacula-9.4.2/src/lib/lockmgr.c
*** original-bacula-9.4.2/src/lib/lockmgr.c Tue Feb 5 03:47:31 2019
--- bacula-9.4.2/src/lib/lockmgr.c Mon Mar 4 17:19:06 2019
***************
*** 53,70 ****
#define ASSERT(x) if (!(x)) { \
char *jcr = NULL; \
Pmsg3(000, _("ASSERT failed at %s:%i: %s\n"), __FILE__, __LINE__,
#x); \
! jcr[0] = 0; }
#define ASSERT_p(x,f,l) if (!(x)) { \
char *jcr = NULL; \
Pmsg3(000, _("ASSERT failed at %s:%i: %s \n"), f, l, #x); \
! jcr[0] = 0; }
#define ASSERT2_p(x,m,f,l) if (!(x)) { \
char *jcr = NULL; \
set_assert_msg(f, l, m); \
Pmsg4(000, _("ASSERT failed at %s:%i: %s (%s)\n"), f, l, #x, m);
\
! jcr[0] = 0; }
/* for lockmgr unit tests we have to clean up developer flags and
asserts which breaks our tests */
#ifdef TEST_PROGRAM
--- 53,70 ----
#define ASSERT(x) if (!(x)) { \
char *jcr = NULL; \
Pmsg3(000, _("ASSERT failed at %s:%i: %s\n"), __FILE__, __LINE__,
#x); \
! abort(); }
#define ASSERT_p(x,f,l) if (!(x)) { \
char *jcr = NULL; \
Pmsg3(000, _("ASSERT failed at %s:%i: %s \n"), f, l, #x); \
! abort(); }
#define ASSERT2_p(x,m,f,l) if (!(x)) { \
char *jcr = NULL; \
set_assert_msg(f, l, m); \
Pmsg4(000, _("ASSERT failed at %s:%i: %s (%s)\n"), f, l, #x, m);
\
! abort(); }
/* for lockmgr unit tests we have to clean up developer flags and
asserts which breaks our tests */
#ifdef TEST_PROGRAM
$ diff -c -r original-bacula-9.4.2/src/lib/message.c
bacula-9.4.2/src/lib/message.c
*** original-bacula-9.4.2/src/lib/message.c Tue Feb 5 03:47:31 2019
--- bacula-9.4.2/src/lib/message.c Mon Mar 4 17:17:12 2019
***************
*** 1413,1419 ****
if (type == M_ABORT) {
char *p = 0;
! p[0] = 0; /* generate segmentation
violation */
}
if (type == M_ERROR_TERM) {
exit(1);
--- 1413,1419 ----
if (type == M_ABORT) {
char *p = 0;
! abort(); /* generate segmentation
violation */
}
if (type == M_ERROR_TERM) {
exit(1);
***************
*** 1551,1557 ****
char *p = 0;
printf("Bacula forced SEG FAULT to obtain traceback.\n");
syslog(LOG_DAEMON|LOG_ERR, "Bacula forced SEG FAULT to obtain
traceback.\n");
! p[0] = 0; /* generate segmentation
violation */
}
if (type == M_ERROR_TERM) {
exit(1);
--- 1551,1557 ----
char *p = 0;
printf("Bacula forced SEG FAULT to obtain traceback.\n");
syslog(LOG_DAEMON|LOG_ERR, "Bacula forced SEG FAULT to obtain
traceback.\n");
! abort(); /* generate segmentation
violation */
}
if (type == M_ERROR_TERM) {
exit(1);
==================================================================
Group 2:
The bane of C++ coding, what happens when you have declarations mixed in
with definitions?
"../lib/cmd_parser.h", line 92: Warning: args hides cmd_parser::args.
"../stored/aligned_dev.h", line 139: Warning: aligned_dev::get_full_addr
hides the virtual function DEVICE::get_full_addr(unsigned, unsigned).
The G++ developers appear to consider this benign, which it is, except,
of course, when it isn't.
These warnings can be switched off by adding
"-erroff=wvarhidemem,hidevf" to CFLAGS, but I don't like to do that.
==================================================================
Of the above three sets of problems, the __SUNPRO_CC guard code can be
safely changed:
#if defined __SUNPRO_CC && __SUNPRO_CC < 0x5150
I am confident that using abort() will not change the behaviour of the
code, but I'll let that mull for while, and see what Kern et al think.
I dislike hiding warnings or errors, so I will not be doing this.
Cheers,
Gary B-)
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
