* Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing [not found] ` <200910011836.n91IacEh027960@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl> @ 2009-10-01 19:40 ` Joel Brobecker 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Joel Brobecker @ 2009-10-01 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Kettenis; +Cc: ralf.corsepius, gdb-patches, jan.kratochvil, tromey [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 672 bytes --] [switching to gcc-patches] > Given that newer GCC versions get whinier and whinier and that we see > false positives from time to time, I would be in favour of disabling > -Werror for releases. Makes sense to me. I've just committed the following patch on the branch, after having re-built GDB on x86-linux, making sure that -Werror is no longer used by default anymore. (this is the same patch than the one I applied for GDB 6.6 by the way). 2009-10-01 Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> * configure.ac: Disable -Werror by default. * configure: Regenerate. I'll update my release procedure/scripts to do the same for future releases. -- Joel [-- Attachment #2: werror.diff --] [-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 1200 bytes --] Index: configure.ac =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/configure.ac,v retrieving revision 1.106 diff -u -p -r1.106 configure.ac --- configure.ac 10 Sep 2009 03:59:36 -0000 1.106 +++ configure.ac 1 Oct 2009 19:17:55 -0000 @@ -1510,11 +1510,6 @@ AC_ARG_ENABLE(werror, *) AC_MSG_ERROR(bad value ${enableval} for --enable-werror) ;; esac]) -# Enable -Werror by default when using gcc -if test "${GCC}" = yes -a -z "${ERROR_ON_WARNING}" ; then - ERROR_ON_WARNING=yes -fi - WERROR_CFLAGS="" if test "${ERROR_ON_WARNING}" = yes ; then WERROR_CFLAGS="-Werror" Index: configure =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/configure,v retrieving revision 1.288 diff -u -p -r1.288 configure --- configure 10 Sep 2009 03:59:37 -0000 1.288 +++ configure 1 Oct 2009 19:17:59 -0000 @@ -13067,11 +13067,6 @@ if test "${enable_werror+set}" = set; th fi -# Enable -Werror by default when using gcc -if test "${GCC}" = yes -a -z "${ERROR_ON_WARNING}" ; then - ERROR_ON_WARNING=yes -fi - WERROR_CFLAGS="" if test "${ERROR_ON_WARNING}" = yes ; then WERROR_CFLAGS="-Werror" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <m3ljjva3tl.fsf@hase.home>]
[parent not found: <002e01ca427a$5f1363b0$1d3a2b10$@u-strasbg.fr>]
[parent not found: <m3bpkra1vk.fsf@hase.home>]
[parent not found: <4AC49C67.9080502@rtems.org>]
[parent not found: <20091001130909.GA30858@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net>]
[parent not found: <m3ske1st37.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>]
* Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing [not found] ` <m3ske1st37.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> @ 2009-10-02 17:26 ` Jan Kratochvil 2009-10-02 17:38 ` Fix --with-system-readline vs. readline-6.0+ - gdb-7.0? [Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing] Jan Kratochvil 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Jan Kratochvil @ 2009-10-02 17:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Tromey Cc: Ralf Corsepius, Andreas Schwab, Pierre Muller, 'Joel Brobecker', gdb, gdb-patches On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:39:40 +0200, Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes: [...] > Jan> [patch] Fix --with-system-readline vs. readline-6.0+ > Jan> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-07/msg00755.html [...] > This patch is ok. Checked-in: http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs/2009-10/msg00011.html Thanks, Jan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Fix --with-system-readline vs. readline-6.0+ - gdb-7.0? [Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing] 2009-10-02 17:26 ` Jan Kratochvil @ 2009-10-02 17:38 ` Jan Kratochvil 2009-10-02 17:49 ` Tom Tromey 2009-10-02 21:07 ` Joel Brobecker 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Jan Kratochvil @ 2009-10-02 17:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Ralf Corsepius, Andreas Schwab, Pierre Muller, gdb-patches, Tom Tromey On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 19:25:41 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote: > On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:39:40 +0200, Tom Tromey wrote: > > >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes: > [...] > > Jan> [patch] Fix --with-system-readline vs. readline-6.0+ > > Jan> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-07/msg00755.html > [...] > > This patch is ok. > > Checked-in: > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs/2009-10/msg00011.html Forgot to ask if it should go for gdb-7.0. Jan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix --with-system-readline vs. readline-6.0+ - gdb-7.0? [Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing] 2009-10-02 17:38 ` Fix --with-system-readline vs. readline-6.0+ - gdb-7.0? [Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing] Jan Kratochvil @ 2009-10-02 17:49 ` Tom Tromey 2009-10-02 21:07 ` Joel Brobecker 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Tom Tromey @ 2009-10-02 17:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Joel Brobecker, Ralf Corsepius, Andreas Schwab, Pierre Muller, gdb-patches Jan> Forgot to ask if it should go for gdb-7.0. I'll defer to Joel's judgment. Tom ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Fix --with-system-readline vs. readline-6.0+ - gdb-7.0? [Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing] 2009-10-02 17:38 ` Fix --with-system-readline vs. readline-6.0+ - gdb-7.0? [Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing] Jan Kratochvil 2009-10-02 17:49 ` Tom Tromey @ 2009-10-02 21:07 ` Joel Brobecker 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Joel Brobecker @ 2009-10-02 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: Ralf Corsepius, Andreas Schwab, Pierre Muller, gdb-patches, Tom Tromey > > > >>>>> "Jan" == Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com> writes: > > [...] > > > Jan> [patch] Fix --with-system-readline vs. readline-6.0+ > > > Jan> http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-07/msg00755.html > > [...] > > > This patch is ok. > > > > Checked-in: > > http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-cvs/2009-10/msg00011.html > > Forgot to ask if it should go for gdb-7.0. As discussed with Tom on IRC, our understanding is that this is not a critical bug, and therefore is not needed on the branch. -- Joel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <004701ca428e$fa377c50$eea674f0$@u-strasbg.fr>]
[parent not found: <20091001172928.GE6532@adacore.com>]
* [RFA] more fixes to testsuite (was RE: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing) [not found] ` <20091001172928.GE6532@adacore.com> @ 2009-10-01 21:22 ` Pierre Muller 2009-10-01 21:28 ` Joel Brobecker 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Pierre Muller @ 2009-10-01 21:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Joel Brobecker'; +Cc: gdb, gdb-patches I here request approval for changes to the testsuite related to problems on a configuration where gcc emits format warnings by default. > -----Message d'origine----- > De : gdb-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-owner@sourceware.org] De la > part de Joel Brobecker > Envoyé : Thursday, October 01, 2009 7:29 PM > À : Pierre Muller > Cc : gdb@sourceware.org > Objet : Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing > > > 3) gdb.base/shr1.c (wrong format arg type) > > 3) is about an address, but "%p" does not seem to be supported by all > > C lib format implementation, so I don't know if this can be fixed > correctly. > > We already use %p in a couple of testcase, so let's use it again here. > Best to avoid printing stuff on stdout/stderr when writing a testcase, > as we don't always have access to the inferior output (for instance, > when doing remote debugging), so matching the inferior output in the > testcase won't work in those case. But we'd have to dig deeper in > the history of this testcase to determine whether removing the printf > would not impact the effectiveness of the testcase. I used "%p" as suggested. > For now, I vote for a group hug and the use of %p. > > > 4) gdb.base/unload.c (format arg not literal) > > 5) gdb.base/watchpoint-solib.c (format arg not literal) > > 4) and 5) seem more difficult ... > > Is that the source of the problem? > > fprintf (stderr, dlerror ()); > > The following should take care of it: > > fprintf (stderr, "%s", dlerror ()) > > -- > Joel This was a bit more tricky, because dlerror is a macro if __WIN32__ is defined, I removed the macro and separated the fprintf. Is this OK? Tested on gcc16, no changes in the results of these tests. PS: the #ifdef __WIN32__ should probably be replaced by something that is also defined for 64-bit windows, no? 2009-10-01 Pierre Muller <muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr> * src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/shr1.c: Use %p in format string. * src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/unload.c: Avoid warning in fprintf. * src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-solib.c: Idem. Index: src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/shr1.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/shr1.c,v retrieving revision 1.1.1.2 diff -u -p -r1.1.1.2 shr1.c --- src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/shr1.c 28 Jun 1999 16:04:00 -0000 1.1.1.2 +++ src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/shr1.c 1 Oct 2009 20:58:06 -0000 @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ int x; sg = 6.6; sgi++; sgs = 8; - printf("address of sgs is 0x%x\n", &sgs); + printf("address of sgs is %p\n", &sgs); return 2*x; } Index: src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/unload.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/unload.c,v retrieving revision 1.9 diff -u -p -r1.9 unload.c --- src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/unload.c 3 Jan 2009 05:58:03 -0000 1.9 +++ src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/unload.c 1 Oct 2009 20:58:06 -0000 @@ -27,7 +27,6 @@ # define dlsym(handle, func) GetProcAddress (handle, func) #endif #define dlclose(handle) FreeLibrary (handle) -#define dlerror() "error %d occurred", GetLastError () #else #include <dlfcn.h> #endif @@ -53,7 +52,11 @@ int main() if (!unloadshr) { - fprintf (stderr, dlerror ()); +#ifdef __WIN32__ + fprintf (stderr, "error %d occurred", GetLastError ()); +#else + fprintf (stderr, "%s", dlerror ()); +#endif exit (1); } Index: src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-solib.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-solib.c,v retrieving revision 1.2 diff -u -p -r1.2 watchpoint-solib.c --- src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-solib.c 3 Jan 2009 05:58:03 -0000 1.2 +++ src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-solib.c 1 Oct 2009 20:58:06 -0000 @@ -27,7 +27,6 @@ # define dlsym(handle, func) GetProcAddress (handle, func) #endif #define dlclose(handle) FreeLibrary (handle) -#define dlerror() "error %d occurred", GetLastError () #else #include <dlfcn.h> #endif @@ -42,7 +41,11 @@ void open_shlib () if (!handle) { - fprintf (stderr, dlerror ()); +#ifdef __WIN32__ + fprintf (stderr, "error %d occurred", GetLastError ()); +#else + fprintf (stderr, "%s", dlerror ()); +#endif exit (1); } ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFA] more fixes to testsuite (was RE: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing) 2009-10-01 21:22 ` [RFA] more fixes to testsuite (was RE: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing) Pierre Muller @ 2009-10-01 21:28 ` Joel Brobecker 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Joel Brobecker @ 2009-10-01 21:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pierre Muller; +Cc: gdb, gdb-patches > PS: the #ifdef __WIN32__ > should probably be replaced by > something that is also defined for > 64-bit windows, no? We're "lucky" in this case, because __WIN32__ happens to be defined on Windows64. > 2009-10-01 Pierre Muller <muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr> > > * src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/shr1.c: Use %p in format string. > * src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/unload.c: Avoid warning in fprintf. > * src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/watchpoint-solib.c: Idem. I think it would have been simpler to defile a dlerror *function* that returns a string, but this is fine too. -- Joel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-10-02 21:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20090930204828.GB31446@adacore.com>
[not found] ` <4AC41F44.1040502@rtems.org>
[not found] ` <20091001170744.GC6532@adacore.com>
[not found] ` <4AC4E4F6.5080500@rtems.org>
[not found] ` <200910011733.n91HXDnX007084@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
[not found] ` <20091001182740.GG6532@adacore.com>
[not found] ` <200910011836.n91IacEh027960@brahms.sibelius.xs4all.nl>
2009-10-01 19:40 ` GDB 6.8.92 available for testing Joel Brobecker
[not found] ` <m3ljjva3tl.fsf@hase.home>
[not found] ` <002e01ca427a$5f1363b0$1d3a2b10$@u-strasbg.fr>
[not found] ` <m3bpkra1vk.fsf@hase.home>
[not found] ` <4AC49C67.9080502@rtems.org>
[not found] ` <20091001130909.GA30858@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net>
[not found] ` <m3ske1st37.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
2009-10-02 17:26 ` Jan Kratochvil
2009-10-02 17:38 ` Fix --with-system-readline vs. readline-6.0+ - gdb-7.0? [Re: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing] Jan Kratochvil
2009-10-02 17:49 ` Tom Tromey
2009-10-02 21:07 ` Joel Brobecker
[not found] ` <004701ca428e$fa377c50$eea674f0$@u-strasbg.fr>
[not found] ` <20091001172928.GE6532@adacore.com>
2009-10-01 21:22 ` [RFA] more fixes to testsuite (was RE: GDB 6.8.92 available for testing) Pierre Muller
2009-10-01 21:28 ` Joel Brobecker
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox