Jim Meyering wrote:
Matthew Woehlke wrote:
It's not be the only one.
It's probably the only one in gnulib.
True.
Ok, first, we'll try the patch:
patching file remove.c
You're welcome to do this on your own, but it will take at least a few
more requests to support old compilers (with explanation why it's required)
before I spend time on c99-to-c89 again.
So, what, I'm stuck patching by hand? (*Someone* else was just
complaining on -gnulib, don't know if they were building coreutils
though, or if they plan to.)
I can update the patch but I don't have papers and very likely wouldn't
be able to get them. The /changes/ would all be trivial of course, but
touching quite a few lines of code...
Also, here is a different (AIX-only) error:
cc -qlanglvl=ansi -qlanglvl=ansi -g -o ln ln.o libver.a
../lib/libcoreutils.a /home/install/gnu/rs6000_aix/lib/libintl.a
-lpthread -lc ../lib/libcoreutils.a
source='ls.c' object='ls.o' libtool=no \
DEPDIR=.deps depmode=aix /bin/sh ../build-aux/depcomp \
cc -qlanglvl=ansi -qlanglvl=ansi -I. -I../lib -I../lib
-I/home/install/gnu/rs6000_aix/include -g -c ls.c
"ls.c", line 715.8: 1506-112 (E) Duplicate type qualifier "volatile"
ignored.
"ls.c", line 719.8: 1506-112 (E) Duplicate type qualifier "volatile"
ignored.
make[3]: *** [ls.o] Error 1
I just ran into this also with some other package (possibly gettext or
subversion*); might call for a fix at a higher level (gnulib or
autoconf?). sig_atomic_t is already volatile on AIX (I checked last
time) so the extra 'volatile' should just be dropped. Maybe something
like:
#if SIG_ATOMIC_T_IS_VOLATILE
#define SIG_ATOMIC_T_VOLATILE sig_atomic_t
#else
#define SIG_ATOMIC_T_VOLATILE volatile sig_atomic_t
#endif
We really don't want to impose that on every application
that uses sig_atomic_t.
Can you find out where they define or typedef sig_atomic_t?
This?
$ find /usr/include | xargs grep sig_atomic_t
/usr/include/sys/signal.h:typedef volatile int sig_atomic_t;
If you're looking for a magic 'don't declare it as volatile', there
isn't obviously one.
Maybe we can work around it in a more global manner.
Last time I had to remove the extra 'volatile'. Offhand I don't see
another solution.
--
Matthew
Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.
--
"Two IIRC's must make a right" -- Larry Hall (paraphrased)
_______________________________________________
Bug-coreutils mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
