Re: Problems building rsync with Clang 15 beta
On 8/18/22 19:31, Wayne Davison wrote: Maybe Clang 15 broke the testing idiom that sets $GCC? I think Clang has always pretended to be GCC well enough to fool Autoconf so that 'configure' sets GCC. What's new in Clang 15 is that it starts being pedantic about empty arglists, apparently. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Problems building rsync with Clang 15 beta
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 9:27 AM Paul Eggert wrote: > But if rsync must add -pedantic-errors for some reason, it should do so at > the very end of 'configure' I think I'll just get rid of it except for some private builds. perhaps it'd be better for rsync to also add -pedantic-errors only for GCC > not Clang My configure script did that using the $GCC var that configure sets: if test x"$GCC" = x"yes"; then Maybe Clang 15 broke the testing idiom that sets $GCC? ..wayne.. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Problems building rsync with Clang 15 beta
On 8/18/22 09:38, Khem Raj wrote: I think the autoconf patch should be good on its own merits regardless It partly depends on how much we care about compatibility. Putting the 'void' in there will break pre-C89 compilers, as well as C++ compilers pretending (badly) to be C compilers. I doubt whether we care about the former any more, but the latter might be an issue. there were few other package builds which started to succeed after this change in autoconf Which ones, exactly, and why? -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Re: Problems building rsync with Clang 15 beta
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 8:22 AM Paul Eggert wrote: > > On 8/17/22 23:58, Khem Raj wrote: > > rsync which add -pedantic-errors option to cflags during configure > > OK, that's the problem then. 'configure' should not use flags like > -pedantic-errors. This has long been a property of 'autoconf'-generated > scripts. > > The simplest way to fix this would be for rsync to not add > -pedantic-errors, as it's more trouble than it's worth. If rsync must > add -pedantic-errors for some reason, it should do so at the very end of > 'configure', as in the attached untested patch, so as not to screw up > earlier 'configure' tests; and perhaps it'd be better for rsync to also > add -pedantic-errors only for GCC not Clang (since Clang is more likely > to mutate further in this area). > > Really, though, omitting -pedantic-errors entirely is the way to go. > -pedantic-errors should be enabled only for special purposes, by > explicit request of the person running 'configure' and/or 'make'; it's > not suitable as a default option. I think the autoconf patch should be good on its own merits regardless since I have not looked deeply but there were few other package builds which started to succeed after this change in autoconf so I think rsync is not the only candidate. What do you think ? > > Anyway, please give this rsync patch a try. I'll cc it to the rsync > mailing list to give rsync developers a heads-up about the compatibility > problem building rsync with Clang 15 (which luckily does not exist yet :-). Thanks for the rsync patch Paul, I will give it a shot. -- Please use reply-all for most replies to avoid omitting the mailing list. To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
