I raised the question of whether the OS/X changes introduced and backported
in APR are still necessary or desired, or if they should be backed out, and
whether this patch, munged for APR_ macros, is needed for apr 1.6.3 tag?
On Oct 16, 2017 11:31, "Yann Ylavic" <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote:
I didn't look at the APR issue still, same one?
At first glance, APR_ADD_GCC_CFLAG doesn't exist, neither does
--maintainer-mode try to set -Werror.
Or am I missing something?
Also, do we want this for APR-1.6 and 1.7? IIRC for instance our use
of readdir[_r]() might trigger warnings with latest linuxes, or was
On Oct 16, 2017 11:19, <yla...@apache.org> wrote:
Date: Mon Oct 16 16:19:46 2017
New Revision: 1812303
Propose finalized alternative.
--- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Mon Oct 16 16:19:46 2017
@@ -214,6 +214,19 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
in CTR flow, adding my +1 to note that the patch looks sane.]
rjung: I think we need this also for GCC, not only recent clang.
See the dev list discusion about using NOTEST_CFLAGS.
+ ylavic: Consider (and test ;) proposal below instead?
+ *) configure.in: Fix maintainer mode with GCC/Clang.
+ Setting -Wstrict-prototypes in combination with -Werror leads to
+ errors during configure checks (autoconf generates incomplete
+ As suggested by Joe, add --maintainer/debugger-mode's CFLAGS in
+ NOTEST_CFLAGS to avoid interractions with autoconf's AC_LANG_PROGRAM.
+ APACHE_ADD_GCC_CFLAG now also forces -Wno-strict-prototypes for
+ to work despite AC_LANG_PROGRAM generating this warning by itself.
+ trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/r1812263
+ 2.4.x patch: svn merge -c 1812263,1812301 ^/httpd/httpd/trunk .
+ +1: ylavic
PATCHES/ISSUES THAT ARE BEING WORKED