Ah, sys/types.h doesn't try to define bool unless bool isn't already defined *and* _KERNEL || STANDALONE is defined. The libprocstat offenders pull in a bunch of other system headers that pull in types.h before they fake-define _KERNEL, so there's never a chance for bool to be defined. And I should've known the "fix" of including stdbool was pointless, because the vfs_* function types obviously are only defined for kernel builds.

So, it's either use _Bool or make libprocstat pay for its hackery by manually including stdbool.h. I'm kinda in favor of the latter:)

On 5/29/21 5:53 PM, Jason Harmening wrote:
Actually that doesn't fix it, so I've reverted both commits for now.
I'm not sure what other BS is going on here.

On 5/29/21 4:50 PM, Rebecca Cran wrote:
On 5/29/21 3:42 PM, Jason A. Harmening wrote:
The branch main has been updated by jah:

URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=54256e7954d7efeee53bd1ab4d08d0c772b55f4d

commit 54256e7954d7efeee53bd1ab4d08d0c772b55f4d
Author:     Jason A. Harmening <[email protected]>
AuthorDate: 2021-05-29 21:45:09 +0000
Commit:     Jason A. Harmening <[email protected]>
CommitDate: 2021-05-29 21:45:42 +0000

     Fix userspace build after commit  6d3e78ad6c11
     Reported by: jenkins
---
  sys/sys/mount.h | 2 ++
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/sys/sys/mount.h b/sys/sys/mount.h
index 684d8c3eb780..6c1cd82ee84f 100644
--- a/sys/sys/mount.h
+++ b/sys/sys/mount.h
@@ -43,6 +43,8 @@
  #include <sys/tslog.h>
  #include <sys/_mutex.h>
  #include <sys/_sx.h>
+#else
+#include <stdbool.h>
  #endif
  /*

I'm seeing this error even with this commit:


--- lib/libprocstat__L ---
In file included from /usr/src/lib/libprocstat/msdosfs.c:51:
/usr/obj/usr/src/amd64.amd64/tmp/usr/include/sys/mount.h:765:7: error: unknown type name 'bool'
                     bool *mp_busy);
                     ^

_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/dev-commits-src-main
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"

Reply via email to