On 09/22/2015 04:48 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 04:38:31PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
mingw on Fedora 22 replaces localtime_r and gmtime_r
macros with posix compliant functions in time.h.

These conflict with QEMU supplied ones.

Detect this and avoid overriding them.

We also need to define POSIX_C_SOURCE before including
time.h for the first time, to make sure these
are available to all users.

Reported-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com>
Cc: Stefan Weil <s...@weilnetz.de>
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com>
---
  include/qemu/osdep.h      | 1 +
  include/sysemu/os-win32.h | 6 ++++++
  util/oslib-win32.c        | 4 ++++
  3 files changed, 11 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/qemu/osdep.h b/include/qemu/osdep.h
index ab3c876..9920ac3 100644
--- a/include/qemu/osdep.h
+++ b/include/qemu/osdep.h
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
  #ifndef QEMU_OSDEP_H
  #define QEMU_OSDEP_H
+#define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 200809L
  #include "config-host.h"
  #include "qemu/compiler.h"
  #include <stdarg.h>
diff --git a/include/sysemu/os-win32.h b/include/sysemu/os-win32.h
index 706d85a..74230e7 100644
--- a/include/sysemu/os-win32.h
+++ b/include/sysemu/os-win32.h
@@ -72,11 +72,17 @@
  #define sigsetjmp(env, savemask) setjmp(env)
  #define siglongjmp(env, val) longjmp(env, val)
+#ifdef gmtime_r
  /* Missing POSIX functions. Don't use MinGW-w64 macros. */
  #undef gmtime_r
+#define QEMU_NEED_GMTIME_R
  struct tm *gmtime_r(const time_t *timep, struct tm *result);
+#endif
I don't think this is right. There are three possibilities
with mingw

  - No gmtime_r at all  - need replacement
  - gmtime_r defined as a macro - need replacement
  - gmtime_r defined as a function - nothing needed

With this change of yours, if gmtime_r is defined as a macro
QEMU will provide its own replacement. If gmtime_r is not
defined at all, then QEMU doesn't provide its replacement
which is wrong. I believe the change I previously proposed
works in all three cases

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2015-09/msg01926.html
indeed, this looks better to me.

Den

Reply via email to