Hal Murray via devel :
>
> Gary said:
> > In a perfect world someone rewrites ntp_parser.tab.c in a modern language.
>
> What are the options in that area?
Not so great. Nothing but Bison really makes strategic sense.
(Hey, Ian! Pay attention. Lore of some significance about to be spoken.)
I've not looked at the build system configuration *at all* closely
(perhaps a more accurate reading would be "at all"), but can't you just
configure it to not use the offending -W switch when analyzing/compiling
the parser's C code?
- *John D. Bell*
On 06/18/2018 04:37 PM, Eric S. Raymond
Gary said:
> In a perfect world someone rewrites ntp_parser.tab.c in a modern language.
What are the options in that area?
wc ntpd/ntp_parser.y
1460 3242 27686 ntpd/ntp_parser.y
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
___
devel mailing list
Eric said:
> It's not actually in the least difficult to design a skeleton that gets this
> right. I did it once. The point is that that warning is nothing we're doing
> wrong, it's GCC correctly noticing that the skeleton code kinda sucks, and we
> probably *would* have to build a custom
Yo Ian!
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:41:05 -0500
Ian Bruene via devel wrote:
> So why haven't the skeletons been fixed in all this time? The only
> reasons I can see are Write Once Forget Forever, and unwillingness to
> use more modern features that not all projects are able to use (which
> could
On 06/18/2018 03:37 PM, Eric S. Raymond via devel wrote:
Ah, now that's the kind of error pattern I *expect* from Bison parsers.
The underlying problem is that the C in Bison parser skeletons is
really archaic. It dates from times when not even the value of
procedural encapsulation was fully
Hal Murray :
>
> devel@ntpsec.org said:
> >> It only generates warnings on a few systems. I don't see why not
> >> on the others. ??
> > I looked at the code. Noting mysterious or suspcious there; has to be some
> > kind of compiler version-skew issue.
>
> Or a glitch in my brain.
>
> I'm
Hal Murray via devel :
> This one looks more complicated:
> ntp_parser.tab.c:1469:3: warning: switch missing default case
> [-Wswitch-default]
> It only generates warnings on a few systems. I don't see why not on the
> others. ??
I looked at the code. Noting mysterious or suspcious there;
devel@ntpsec.org said:
> Oh. Gary's builds must be using "./waf configure --enable-warnings". That
> enables "-Wswitch-default" and other extra checks where available. I'll
> check the implications of enabling that for all jobs and make also enabling
> "-Werror" so that GitLab builds will
Yo Hal!
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:19:57 -0700
Hal Murray wrote:
> > I'm seeing some warnings on NTPsec git head with Gentoo stable on
> > RasPi.
>
> They are from my recent authentication work.
Figures.
> Does it happen on X86?
I do not have any x86 hosts anymore. But same thing on amd64
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 03:48:19PM +, Matthew Selsky via devel wrote:
> @Gary: are these warnings specific to 32-bit, ARM, or something else?
Oh. Gary's builds must be using "./waf configure --enable-warnings". That
enables "-Wswitch-default" and other extra checks where available. I'll
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 12:19:57AM -0700, Hal Murray via devel wrote:
>
> > I'm seeing some warnings on NTPsec git head with Gentoo stable on RasPi.
>
> They are from my recent authentication work.
>
> Does it happen on X86?
>
> I thought we had gentoo on the gitlab collection. I didn't get
> I'm seeing some warnings on NTPsec git head with Gentoo stable on RasPi.
They are from my recent authentication work.
Does it happen on X86?
I thought we had gentoo on the gitlab collection. I didn't get any
complaints. Is there a magic flag we need to turn on? That seems like a
13 matches
Mail list logo
