On Sun, 2016-11-27 at 18:02 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Hello, ... > > But as you wish, an updated patch is attached. > > _Bool > Continued (uint32_t *w) > { > +#ifndef WCONTINUED > + *w = 0; > + return 0; > +#else > return WIFCONTINUED (*w) != 0; > +#endif > } > > Err, recheck the semantic of WCONTINUED again, it doesn't modify its > parameter, it just tests its value. > > Do as I said, just return 0. >
No I can't the compiler complains about an unused variable. Maybe adding an __attribute__((unused)) to the function header? ... <about renaming files> > > > This is for upstream to decide. > > I'm just afraid they'd just frown on the code submission and not take > the time to explain how they want it to look like if we don't raise > the > discussion ourselves. > Should we propose these changes upstream? Or do you mean something else? > > > And > > > src_libgo_go_syscall_syscall_gnu_test.go: New file: > > > Define Type and Whence as 32bit in syscall.Flock_t > > > > > > Again, you'll probably have to discuss with upstream to see how > > > they > > > prefer to make it configurable rather than forking the whole > > > file. > > > > > > > I tried to patch the syscall_unix_test.go file, but did not > > succeed. > > Definitely if runtime.GOOS == "GNU" ... else ... or switch > > runtime.GOOS > > ... does not work. The compiler sees all code and complains, also > > the > > else part of the code :( Therefore I created a new file. > > Then ask upstream how they think it can and should be done. > Upstream would be Ian Lance Taylor, right? > > > > -CLEANFILES = *.go *.gox goc2c *.c s-version libgo.sum > > > > libgo.log > > > > +CLEANFILES = *.go *.gox goc2c *.c s-* libgo.sum libgo.log > > > > > > This seems unrelated? > > > > > No, this is not unrelated: With this patch you can > > make -C build/i686-gnu/libgo clean > > make -C build/i686-gnu/libgo > > to rebuild libgo. Otherwise libcalls.go is not regenerated, > > mksysinfo.sh is not run etc. > > That's still unrelated to the matter here: porting go to > GNU/Hurd. It > looks like a bug fix which is completely independant from GNU/Hurd. Yes it is not Hurd-related. Maybe this should be filed as a separate bug. To gcc upstream directly? > > > > > > > > > We could rather just implement the comm field in ps, AIUI it's > > > just an alias for the command field. > > > > Your choice. When implemented this patch wouldn't bee needed. > > Then please do implement it :) Sorry, I need help for doing this. Any other Hurd developer listening? Thanks for reviewing :) Nice to see that anybody cares.