Hi Matt Again this is one of those differences between a general certification tool and a regression tool. At the moment the tool is designed to be compiler unawares, hence this would be a FIP. The normal way we recommend handling this is for use of a script to front end the compiler to remove any warnings (or copyright notices or other annoying messages), something along the lines of:
#!/bin/sh # # ccc - front end to cc, hides the warning messages # PID=$$ cc "$@" 2>/tmp/tmp$PID retcode=$? grep -v 'insert your warning here' /tmp/tmp$PID rm -rf /tmp/tmp$PID exit $retcode Again this is something we need to have documented. regards Andrew On Aug 20, 2:29pm in "Re: PTHR.hdr failure", Matt Taggart wrote: > > > Whilst glibc may be putting this advice out to application > > writers , these are required POSIX functions and thus required for > > implementations seeking POSIX compliance. > > Ok, since I don't expect glibc is going to change it's output could the tests > be changed to be able to deal with this particular kind of output? >
