NetBSD Problem Report #49854

From www@NetBSD.org  Sat Apr 25 13:09:07 2015
Return-Path: <www@NetBSD.org>
Received: from mail.netbsd.org (mail.netbsd.org [149.20.53.66])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "mail.netbsd.org", Issuer "Postmaster NetBSD.org" (not verified))
	by mollari.NetBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41409A57FD
	for <gnats-bugs@gnats.NetBSD.org>; Sat, 25 Apr 2015 13:09:07 +0000 (UTC)
Message-Id: <20150425130906.1282BA6555@mollari.NetBSD.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2015 13:09:06 +0000 (UTC)
From: n54@gmx.com
Reply-To: n54@gmx.com
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Subject: libnbcompat: strtoll(3) mentioned twice for AC_REPLACE_FUNCS()
X-Send-Pr-Version: www-1.0

>Number:         49854
>Category:       pkg
>Synopsis:       libnbcompat: strtoll(3) mentioned twice for AC_REPLACE_FUNCS()
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       non-critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    joerg
>State:          open
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Sat Apr 25 13:10:00 +0000 2015
>Closed-Date:    
>Last-Modified:  Mon Oct 31 19:05:00 +0000 2016
>Originator:     Kamil Rytarowski
>Release:        current
>Organization:
>Environment:
N/A
>Description:
strtoll(3) is mentioned twice in AC_REPLACE_FUNCS():

- for all systems
- for systems with long long support
>How-To-Repeat:
Check: pkgtools/libnbcompat/files/configure.ac
>Fix:
Apply the following patch and regenerate the files. This patch removes the general check for strtoll(3) and leaves the check for systems with long long support.

Index: configure.ac
===================================================================
RCS file: /public/netbsd-rsync/pkgsrc/pkgtools/libnbcompat/files/configure.ac,v
retrieving revision 1.84
diff -u -r1.84 configure.ac
--- configure.ac        19 Apr 2015 12:22:14 -0000      1.84
+++ configure.ac        25 Apr 2015 12:51:55 -0000
@@ -300,7 +300,7 @@
 AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([asprintf err fgetln fnmatch fparseln getdelim getenv \
        getline isblank lchflags lchmod lchown lutimes mkdtemp mkstemp setenv \
        setgroupent setpassent setprogname shquote snprintf statvfs strdup \
-       strerror strlcat strlcpy strmode strsep strtoll unsetenv usleep \
+       strerror strlcat strlcpy strmode strsep unsetenv usleep \
        utimes warn
 ])


>Release-Note:

>Audit-Trail:

Responsible-Changed-From-To: pkg-manager->joerg
Responsible-Changed-By: bsiegert@NetBSD.org
Responsible-Changed-When: Sun, 28 Jun 2015 15:07:16 +0000
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Over to maintainer.


From: coypu@SDF.ORG
To: gnats-bugs@netbsd.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: pkg/49854
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 18:16:49 +0000

 ping.
 any reason not to apply this?

From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@bec.de>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: pkg/49854
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 19:53:48 +0100

 On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 06:20:00PM +0000, coypu@SDF.ORG wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR pkg/49854; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: coypu@SDF.ORG
 > To: gnats-bugs@netbsd.org
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: pkg/49854
 > Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 18:16:49 +0000
 > 
 >  ping.
 >  any reason not to apply this?

 I don't want to mess with the long long logic. If I ever decide to touch
 that, it will likely be to just rip it out.

 Joerg

From: David Holland <dholland-pbugs@netbsd.org>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: pkg/49854
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 04:01:20 +0000

 On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 06:55:01PM +0000, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
  >  > The following reply was made to PR pkg/49854; it has been noted by GNATS.
  >  > 
  >  > From: coypu@SDF.ORG
  >  > To: gnats-bugs@netbsd.org
  >  > Cc: 
  >  > Subject: Re: pkg/49854
  >  > Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 18:16:49 +0000
  >  > 
  >  >  ping.
  >  >  any reason not to apply this?
  >  
  >  I don't want to mess with the long long logic. If I ever decide to touch
  >  that, it will likely be to just rip it out.

 so is that WONTFIX?

 -- 
 David A. Holland
 dholland@netbsd.org

From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@bec.de>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: pkg/49854
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:48:33 +0100

 On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 04:05:01AM +0000, David Holland wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR pkg/49854; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: David Holland <dholland-pbugs@netbsd.org>
 > To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: pkg/49854
 > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 04:01:20 +0000
 > 
 >  On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 06:55:01PM +0000, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
 >   >  > The following reply was made to PR pkg/49854; it has been noted by GNATS.
 >   >  > 
 >   >  > From: coypu@SDF.ORG
 >   >  > To: gnats-bugs@netbsd.org
 >   >  > Cc: 
 >   >  > Subject: Re: pkg/49854
 >   >  > Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 18:16:49 +0000
 >   >  > 
 >   >  >  ping.
 >   >  >  any reason not to apply this?
 >   >  
 >   >  I don't want to mess with the long long logic. If I ever decide to touch
 >   >  that, it will likely be to just rip it out.
 >  
 >  so is that WONTFIX?

 Effectively, yeah.

 Joerg

State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
State-Changed-By: dholland@NetBSD.org
State-Changed-When: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:45:00 +0000
State-Changed-Why:
WONTFIX. maybe negotiate with joerg for a patch he'll actually take...


State-Changed-From-To: closed->open
State-Changed-By: kamil@NetBSD.org
State-Changed-When: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 18:27:54 +0100
State-Changed-Why:

WONTFIX isn't any solution and help to the issue. We are somewhere between long long support and lack of it. My patch wasn't about ll support in general, but broken duplication of check for strtoll(3). 

This blocks me from adding support for strtoi(3) and later software using our libc.

If we won't support ll, so then I will propose a patch to remove that copy and problem solved.

Reopening


From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@bec.de>
To: gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: joerg@NetBSD.org, pkgsrc-bugs@netbsd.org, gnats-admin@netbsd.org,
	kamil@NetBSD.org, n54@gmx.com
Subject: Re: pkg/49854 (libnbcompat: strtoll(3) mentioned twice for
 AC_REPLACE_FUNCS())
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 19:08:53 +0100

 On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 05:27:54PM +0000, kamil@NetBSD.org wrote:
 > WONTFIX isn't any solution and help to the issue. We are somewhere
 > between long long support and lack of it. My patch wasn't about ll
 > support in general, but broken duplication of check for strtoll(3). 

 The duplicated check by itself is harmless. It isn't clear whether the
 long long non-support glue works properly or even where it is needed at
 all. As such, it is unclear on whether the second instance is necessary
 or not.

 > If we won't support ll, so then I will propose a patch to remove that copy and problem solved.

 I think you are confused about the problem at hand.

 Joerg

From: Kamil Rytarowski <n54@gmx.com>
To: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@bec.de>, gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
Cc: joerg@NetBSD.org, pkgsrc-bugs@netbsd.org, gnats-admin@netbsd.org,
 kamil@NetBSD.org
Subject: Re: pkg/49854 (libnbcompat: strtoll(3) mentioned twice for
 AC_REPLACE_FUNCS())
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 19:58:00 +0100

 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
 --6rIhlGsns96dRVIMwxCn7OUJFohxs7L4R
 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="GxRIE9QUowdNkkJAfgJTEmxrCNGDHXe36"
 From: Kamil Rytarowski <n54@gmx.com>
 To: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@bec.de>, gnats-bugs@NetBSD.org
 Cc: joerg@NetBSD.org, pkgsrc-bugs@netbsd.org, gnats-admin@netbsd.org,
  kamil@NetBSD.org
 Message-ID: <83ba8a8d-667d-4edc-ae6e-3df54d983664@gmx.com>
 Subject: Re: pkg/49854 (libnbcompat: strtoll(3) mentioned twice for
  AC_REPLACE_FUNCS())
 References: <pr-pkg-49854@gnats.netbsd.org>
  <20150425130906.1282BA6555@mollari.NetBSD.org>
  <20161031172754.C013C7A2C7@mollari.NetBSD.org>
  <20161031180853.GA9513@britannica.bec.de>
 In-Reply-To: <20161031180853.GA9513@britannica.bec.de>

 --GxRIE9QUowdNkkJAfgJTEmxrCNGDHXe36
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



 On 31.10.2016 19:08, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
 > The duplicated check by itself is harmless. It isn't clear whether the
 > long long non-support glue works properly or even where it is needed at=

 > all. As such, it is unclear on whether the second instance is necessary=

 > or not.

 There was a discussion about "long long" in the ./build.sh tools (like a
 year ago) and  - if I remember correctly Minix people gave up on
 supporting lack of longlong. Personally I don't see any reason to
 support systems (compilers) without it in pkgsrc and C99 might be
 official bare minimum. (I was told that lack of C99 in BSD/OS already
 halts possibility to bootstrap there).

 If there is an agreement on it, I will drop these harmless checks and so
 make clean room for strtoi(3) addition in libnbcompat, based on
 strtoll(3) with longlong support assumption (of course via intmax_t etc).=



 --GxRIE9QUowdNkkJAfgJTEmxrCNGDHXe36--

 --6rIhlGsns96dRVIMwxCn7OUJFohxs7L4R
 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
 Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
 Version: GnuPG v2

 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYF5RFAAoJEEuzCOmwLnZserMP/ih/Xike38pkvCrzVk8NDb6D
 xoKtZ2HC68PEgzqv60U6wejWGo+RnK4n6SEsAtsBXMVbDQG9pKuuS3lvERxQUmV4
 O4SXLqhSp7dgX30T1hXPLhjeYrnblMteu5Dqv2b+YkU8r8TA+zPAmVJjpO49eMW3
 hS9b/BTAVcKrU3VfBlngoCp5hkSMl83Wb5Yzt3ruczoc8XdRS2tH8nU1K8QYcIZw
 waYLoxV8FmFO7l5JGTipMMXypghmp347NnWNzRTF/PonTyVofIRlOkV9Kn5hlrcb
 PCkxHKAMkfuHEphQnT9TQxTvvM/r7TirPif9xwwt9S03g8zWAnsBJ/qXsPZh3i52
 iYNnDkz5Z3iwOcyHHTh1+Epp4wKo0E7qsxwxG2YAje+7WT3fieXcBdNNdQz6Sz5L
 FLIvjlmoHAKw6PqU6HhuVP8DaKeUauY0B9kPK1UluWBLtH+wx042g2JElJ2AEYhV
 Nq573v6fKI3XU1Qg3gS3jbL5+1gkCmPq5otG57UtDUUaLTFXaGL6g147OBTGWB9W
 Ps6+2Ds/JeXaUYPpvRe0nDv+rQN49wbEGDbGzxq5X3sXiHBJWx0xFKtODnqNPRVq
 oyH0szpCMJTHzbiGebzBTVwvWlTuv4g45HDU9a9EdadpCd3g4u+ud5Vf8+jKLT8E
 Nlul/g+1X7YmBGqHm4jf
 =fBSj
 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 --6rIhlGsns96dRVIMwxCn7OUJFohxs7L4R--

>Unformatted:

NetBSD Home
NetBSD PR Database Search

(Contact us) $NetBSD: query-full-pr,v 1.39 2013/11/01 18:47:49 spz Exp $
$NetBSD: gnats_config.sh,v 1.8 2006/05/07 09:23:38 tsutsui Exp $
Copyright © 1994-2014 The NetBSD Foundation, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.