Proof positive the "signedness of char *" warning is useless.

[Rob Landley]

On Thursday 08 December 2005 07:42, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 04:56:47PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
> >On Tuesday 06 December 2005 04:46, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 11:02:31AM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
> >> >/busybox/coreutils/coreutils.a(nohup.o): In function `close_stdout':
> >> >nohup.c:(.text+0x6a): warning:
> >> >/bin/sh: /busybox/docs/autodocifier.pl: /usr/bin/perl: bad interpreter:
> >> > No such file or directory
> >>
> >> What warning was there for nohup::close_stdout() ?
> >
> >That's exactly what the compiler spit out.  (Printing out an empty warning
> >like that sometimes causes gcc 4.0.2 to hang if you attempt a static
> > link.)
> >
> >Bug 531 has a much better output, done by somebody who wasn't using gcc
> > 4.0.2, apparently. :)
> >
> >http://bugs.busybox.net/view.php?id=531
>
> IIRC it's ok for nohup regardless of whether it counts either both or
> one of narrow and wide there, so that should be harmless.

I have a reproduction sequence where attempting to spit out the empty version 
of this warning hangs a static build under gcc 4.0.2.  (This is clearly a gcc 
bug, but "harmless" is a bit strong in this case...)

> I was seeing these undefined references to __isnan and __isinf too when
> building with i386-linux-uclibc- with a somewhat current uClibc.

I think that's either a uClibc floating point issue or we need a clearer guard 
around floating point support somewhere.  I've got it queued up to look at 
this weekend.

Rob
-- 
Steve Ballmer: Innovation!  Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.