On 11/18/2012 03:03 PM, Ivan Burbakov wrote:
what is a proper fix?
Hard to say, as there's not enough info there.
What's the output of this command? It's one of the failing commands,
but with -E replacing -c so that we can see the preprocessor output.
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -std=gnu99
On 11/19/12 14:02, matimatik wrote:
I can grep this line in it:
extern __typeof__ (gets) gets __attribute__ ((__warning__ (gets is a
security hole - use fgets instead)));
Thanks. It appears that the problem is that
HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS is defined, but 'gets' is
not actually being declared.
On 11/19/2012 03:29 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 11/19/12 14:02, matimatik wrote:
I can grep this line in it:
extern __typeof__ (gets) gets __attribute__ ((__warning__ (gets is a
security hole - use fgets instead)));
Thanks. It appears that the problem is that
HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS is
On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 15:08:16 -0700
Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
#if HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS
HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS should only be non-zero if gets() is declared...
'gets' undeclared here (not in a function)
...but this says gets is undeclared. Are you sure you don't have a
stale
On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:29:56 -0800
Paul Eggert egg...@cs.ucla.edu wrote:
It appears that the problem is that
HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS is defined, but 'gets' is
not actually being declared.
Sorry for disgusting, I just found that inetutils-1.9.1 actually has old
gnulib headers. This is actual
On 11/19/2012 04:26 PM, matimatik wrote:
I cannot find #define for HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS in it (moreover,
'grep -R HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS .' in workdir doesn't show anything
relevant). But it does contain GNULIB_GETS='1'.
GNULIB_GETS doesn't appear anywhere in current gnulib sources. Is your
package
SCM sources builds without problems, so inetutils will be fixed with net
release (just by updating gnulib).
Thanks and sorry for disturbance!
On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 16:53:30 -0700
Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
[This wouldn't be the first time
someone has complained that a package suffers from FTBFS when coupled
with newer glibc, because the package was released with an older
gnulib snapshot]
Maybe it should be mentioned on
Eric Blake wrote:
On 11/19/2012 04:26 PM, matimatik wrote:
I cannot find #define for HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS in it (moreover,
'grep -R HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS .' in workdir doesn't show anything
relevant). But it does contain GNULIB_GETS='1'.
GNULIB_GETS doesn't appear anywhere in current gnulib
On 11/19/2012 08:14 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
What do you guys think about a gnulib-tool-time warning
(or perhaps even a configure-time warning for a non-tarball build)
when gnulib is more than N days out of date?
I'd vote against it for configure-time. Most warnings
about the future are
Building of some packages (inetutils, namely) with glibc-2.16 tends to
fail because this line:
/* It is very rare that the developer ever has full control of stdin,
so any use of gets warrants an unconditional warning; besides, C11
removed it. */
#undef gets
#if HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS
11 matches
Mail list logo
