Hi,
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 09:33:57PM +0200, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:55:08PM +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> > On 29/06/11 11:56, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 01:44:23AM +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> > >> The attached patch fixes compilation -Werrors with GCC 4.6
> > >>
> > >> cheers,
> > >> Pádraig.
> > >>
> > >
> > >> Fix compilation with GCC 4.6
> > >>
> > >> avoid -Werror=unused-but-set-variable issues
> > >> remove -Wcast-qual which caused issues with copyHostList()
> > >
> > > Care to explain or show those "issues"?
> >
> > All uses of copyHostList error like:
> >
> > apcsmart.c: In function 'apcsmart_hostlist':
> > apcsmart.c:722:34: error: to be safe all intermediate pointers in cast from
> > 'char **' to 'const char **' must be 'const' qualified [-Werror=cast-qual]
>
> From the gcc 4.5 documentation:
> -Wcast-qual
> Warn whenever a pointer is cast so as to remove a type qualifier from
> the target
> type. For example, warn if a const char * is cast to an ordinary char *.
> Also warn when making a cast which introduces a type qualifier in an
> unsafe
> way. For example, casting char ** to const char ** is unsafe, as in
> this ex-
> ample:
> /* p is char ** value. */
> const char **q = (const char **) p;
> /* Assignment of readonly string to const char * is OK.
> *q = "string";
> /* Now char** pointer points to read-only memory. */
> **p = ’b’;
>
> So apparently it needs to be
>
> include/stonith/stonith_plugin.h:
> struct StonithImports_s {
> ...
> - char **(*CopyHostList)(const char ** hlstring);
> + char **(*CopyHostList)(const char * const * hlstring);
>
> And the callers have to be adjusted accordingly?
> Could you check if that works?
>
> > >> - nbytes=vsnprintf(buf, sizeof(buf)-1, fmt, ap);
> > >> + (void) vsnprintf(buf, sizeof(buf)-1, fmt, ap);
> > >
> > > What is that (void) supposed to achieve?
>
> > Just a personal preference to document
> > we're discarding the return on purpose.
> > I'll remove this extra syntax.
>
> In that case, just leave it in, no problem there.
> I just wondered it was to suppress yet an other warning,
> and which one that might be ;-)
>
> > Updated patch attached.
>
> Thanks, will have a look soon.
> Dejan, anyone, what do you think?
Unfortunately, I'm swamped by other obligations right now.
If the patch helps compile with the new gcc and doesn't break
existing, we can of course include it. I'd just suggest that it
comes in smaller chunks, if I'm not wrong, it contained various
unrelated stuff.
Cheers,
Dejan
> --
> : Lars Ellenberg
> : LINBIT | Your Way to High Availability
> : DRBD/HA support and consulting http://www.linbit.com
>
> DRBD® and LINBIT® are registered trademarks of LINBIT, Austria.
> _______________________________________________________
> Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
> Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: Linux-HA-Dev@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
