Re: AC_CHECK_LIB issues under maintainer mode (Was: Re: Tagging 2.4.29 / 2.5.0-{alpha/beta?} today)

2017-10-16 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: > Am 16.10.2017 um 12:31 schrieb Joe Orton: >> >> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:51:54AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> >>> The long and short is that under maintainer mode, we cannot >>> expect AC_CHECK_LIB to being

Re: AC_CHECK_LIB issues under maintainer mode (Was: Re: Tagging 2.4.29 / 2.5.0-{alpha/beta?} today)

2017-10-16 Thread Rainer Jung
Am 16.10.2017 um 12:31 schrieb Joe Orton: On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:51:54AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: The long and short is that under maintainer mode, we cannot expect AC_CHECK_LIB to being correct any longer, because the combination of -Werror and -Wstrict-prototypes means that any and all

Re: AC_CHECK_LIB issues under maintainer mode (Was: Re: Tagging 2.4.29 / 2.5.0-{alpha/beta?} today)

2017-10-16 Thread Joe Orton
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:51:54AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: > The long and short is that under maintainer mode, we cannot > expect AC_CHECK_LIB to being correct any longer, because > the combination of -Werror and -Wstrict-prototypes means > that any and all functions looked for/checked for

Re: AC_CHECK_LIB issues under maintainer mode (Was: Re: Tagging 2.4.29 / 2.5.0-{alpha/beta?} today)

2017-10-16 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Stefan Eissing wrote: > >> Am 15.10.2017 um 17:52 schrieb Rainer Jung : >> >> Nevertheless I would still say that adding "-Wno-error=strict-prototypes" >> for any clang and gcc version that supports it would

Re: AC_CHECK_LIB issues under maintainer mode (Was: Re: Tagging 2.4.29 / 2.5.0-{alpha/beta?} today)

2017-10-16 Thread Jim Jagielski
I'd be +1 on setting -Wno-error=strict-prototypes unconditionally > On Oct 15, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Rainer Jung wrote: > > Am 15.10.2017 um 16:25 schrieb Yann Ylavic: >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: >>> >>> Why is this

Re: AC_CHECK_LIB issues under maintainer mode (Was: Re: Tagging 2.4.29 / 2.5.0-{alpha/beta?} today)

2017-10-16 Thread Stefan Eissing
> Am 15.10.2017 um 17:52 schrieb Rainer Jung : > > Am 15.10.2017 um 16:25 schrieb Yann Ylavic: >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: >>> >>> Why is this happening now? The "-Werror" was backported last December in >>>

Re: AC_CHECK_LIB issues under maintainer mode (Was: Re: Tagging 2.4.29 / 2.5.0-{alpha/beta?} today)

2017-10-15 Thread Rainer Jung
Am 15.10.2017 um 16:25 schrieb Yann Ylavic: On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: Why is this happening now? The "-Werror" was backported last December in r1772330, which was a backport of r1702948 from trunk (May 2015). Maybe people haven't used

Re: AC_CHECK_LIB issues under maintainer mode (Was: Re: Tagging 2.4.29 / 2.5.0-{alpha/beta?} today)

2017-10-15 Thread Yann Ylavic
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 4:03 PM, Rainer Jung wrote: > > Why is this happening now? The "-Werror" was backported last December in > r1772330, which was a backport of r1702948 from trunk (May 2015). Maybe > people haven't used maintainer mode since then? During the

Re: AC_CHECK_LIB issues under maintainer mode (Was: Re: Tagging 2.4.29 / 2.5.0-{alpha/beta?} today)

2017-10-15 Thread Rainer Jung
Hi Jim, Am 13.10.2017 um 17:51 schrieb Jim Jagielski: Let's recall what is really happening... In maintainer mode, the build system sets -Werror and -Wstrict-prototypes. This means that functions which lack strict prototypes will "fail". Now note that AC_CHECK_LIB does not worry about

Re: AC_CHECK_LIB issues under maintainer mode (Was: Re: Tagging 2.4.29 / 2.5.0-{alpha/beta?} today)

2017-10-13 Thread William A Rowe Jr
Thank you for this summary! On Oct 13, 2017 10:51, "Jim Jagielski" wrote: > Let's recall what is really happening... > > In maintainer mode, the build system sets -Werror and -Wstrict-prototypes. > This means that functions which lack strict prototypes will "fail". > > Now