libtool-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fix bindir and dlopen tests for C++ compilers (CC=g++).


From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: Fix bindir and dlopen tests for C++ compilers (CC=g++).
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 07:42:57 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-09)

Hi Peter,

* Peter O'Gorman wrote on Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 05:15:25AM CET:
> On 11/29/2009 04:12 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >I've built Libtool and run the testsuites with CC=g++ on GNU/Linux,
> >the following patch fixes the fallout.  Pushed as obvious.
> 
> You did 'make check CC=g++'? or './configure CC=g++; make; make check'?

Actually I tried both.  The latter brought me

../libtool/libltdl/ltdl.c: In function 'int find_module(lt__handle**, const 
char*, const char*, const char*, const char*, int, lt__advise*)':
../libtool/libltdl/ltdl.c:533: warning: deprecated conversion from string 
constant to 'char*'
../libtool/libltdl/ltdl.c: In function 'int try_dlopen(lt__handle**, const 
char*, const char*, lt__advise*)':
../libtool/libltdl/ltdl.c:1263: warning: deprecated conversion from string 
constant to 'char*'

which I'm not sure how to best fix in a future-proof way-

> IIRC libltdl itself did not built for me with make distcheck CC=g++
> not because of test suite failures, but because libltdl itself fails
> to build.
> 
> A simple cast allows it to build:

I don't see a warning to that end, my system declares strrchr as
       #include <string.h>

       char *strrchr(const char *s, int c);

What does yours (darwin?) do instead?

> --- a/libltdl/ltdl.c
> +++ b/libltdl/ltdl.c
> @@ -1511,7 +1511,7 @@ has_library_ext (const char *filename)
> 
>    assert (filename);
> 
> -  ext = strrchr (filename, '.');
> +  ext = (char *)strrchr (filename, '.');
> 
>    if (ext && ((streq (ext, archive_ext))
>  #if defined(LT_MODULE_EXT)
> 
> But, I think there were objections to adding random casts like this
> when it came up before?

Well, the cast only looks random as long as we don't know a good
rationale for it, I guess.

Thanks,
Ralf




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]