[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?)
From: |
Santiago Vila |
Subject: |
Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?) |
Date: |
Wed, 14 Jun 2006 21:04:10 +0200 (CEST) |
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Santiago Vila <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > checking for ssize_t... no
>
> This is the crucial problem (in Output2). That test cases includes
> <sys/types.h> and decides that you don't have ssize_t, so it puts
> "#define ssize_t int" into config.h. Yet, as the other files make
> clear, your host does have a ssize_t typedef in <sys/types.h>.
> Can you please inspect config.log for the failing test, and find
> out why it mistakenly thinks your host lacks ssize_t? Thanks.
You'll going to laugh at this :-)
configure:8876: checking for ssize_t
configure:8902: gcc -c -Wall -Werror conftest.c >&5
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
conftest.c: In function 'main':
conftest.c:79: warning: unused variable 'x'
configure:8908: $? = 1
configure: failed program was:
| /* confdefs.h. */
snipped lots of #defines
| /* end confdefs.h. */
| #include <sys/types.h>
| int
| main ()
| {
| int x = sizeof (ssize_t *) + sizeof (ssize_t);
| ;
| return 0;
| }
- Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Eric Blake, 2006/06/14
- Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Jim Meyering, 2006/06/15
- Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Paul Eggert, 2006/06/15
- Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Santiago Vila, 2006/06/15
- Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Eric Blake, 2006/06/15
- stackovf implementation [Was: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?)], Eric Blake, 2006/06/15
- Re: stackovf implementation [Was: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?)], Eric Blake, 2006/06/20
- Re: stackovf implementation [Was: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?)], Santiago Vila, 2006/06/21
- Re: stackovf implementation, Eric Blake, 2006/06/22
Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Bruno Haible, 2006/06/21