Thread: minor compiler warning on OpenBSD
while looking at some other stuff I noticed that we have the following compiler warning on OpenBSD 4.0/amd64 with the OS supplied compiler: gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing -DFRONTEND -I../../../src/interfaces/libpq -I../../../src/include -I/usr/include/kerberosV/ -c -o initdb.o initdb.c initdb.c: In function `locale_date_order': initdb.c:2187: warning: `%x' yields only last 2 digits of year in some locales $ gcc -v Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/amd64-unknown-openbsd4.0/3.3.5/specs Configured with: Thread model: single gcc version 3.3.5 (propolice) Stefan
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes:
> while looking at some other stuff I noticed that we have the following
> compiler warning on OpenBSD 4.0/amd64 with the OS supplied compiler:
> initdb.c:2187: warning: `%x' yields only last 2 digits of year in some
> locales
Yeah, mine complains about that too. Peter's response was "get a newer
compiler" --- apparently the gcc folks thought better of this warning
after the Y2K panic subsided.
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes: >> while looking at some other stuff I noticed that we have the following >> compiler warning on OpenBSD 4.0/amd64 with the OS supplied compiler: >> initdb.c:2187: warning: `%x' yields only last 2 digits of year in some >> locales > > Yeah, mine complains about that too. Peter's response was "get a newer > compiler" --- apparently the gcc folks thought better of this warning > after the Y2K panic subsided. hmm ok - but at least on openbsd we will have to accept that warning fora few years to go (4.1 shipped with 3.3.5 and itseems that the upcoming 4.2 is not getting an upgraded compiler either) Stefan
Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes:
> >> while looking at some other stuff I noticed that we have the following
> >> compiler warning on OpenBSD 4.0/amd64 with the OS supplied compiler:
> >> initdb.c:2187: warning: `%x' yields only last 2 digits of year in some
> >> locales
> >
> > Yeah, mine complains about that too. Peter's response was "get a newer
> > compiler" --- apparently the gcc folks thought better of this warning
> > after the Y2K panic subsided.
>
> hmm ok - but at least on openbsd we will have to accept that warning for
> a few years to go (4.1 shipped with 3.3.5 and it seems that the
> upcoming 4.2 is not getting an upgraded compiler either)
My local manpage for strftime says that we can get around this warning
by overloading it with something like
size_t
my_strftime(char *s, size_t max, const char *fmt, const struct tm *tm)
{return strftime(s, max, fmt, tm);
}
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> My local manpage for strftime says that we can get around this warning
> by overloading it with something like
> size_t
> my_strftime(char *s, size_t max, const char *fmt,
> const struct tm *tm)
> {
> return strftime(s, max, fmt, tm);
> }
Hey, that works nicely. On my version of gcc, it suppresses the warning
even if my_strftime is marked "static inline", which should mean that
there's no runtime penalty.
I've committed the patch to HEAD --- Stefan, would you check if it
silences your version of gcc?
Now if we could only get rid of those flex-induced warnings in ecpg...
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> My local manpage for strftime says that we can get around this warning
>> by overloading it with something like
>
>> size_t
>> my_strftime(char *s, size_t max, const char *fmt,
>> const struct tm *tm)
>> {
>> return strftime(s, max, fmt, tm);
>> }
>
> Hey, that works nicely. On my version of gcc, it suppresses the warning
> even if my_strftime is marked "static inline", which should mean that
> there's no runtime penalty.
>
> I've committed the patch to HEAD --- Stefan, would you check if it
> silences your version of gcc?
yeah that patch fixes the warning for me too - thanks!
Stefan
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 07:18:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Now if we could only get rid of those flex-induced warnings in ecpg... Don't you get the same in the backend's parser code? I surely do. It seems these are only missing prototypes. How about adding an include file with those prototypes? Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes@jabber.org Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 07:18:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Now if we could only get rid of those flex-induced warnings in ecpg...
> Don't you get the same in the backend's parser code? I surely do.
No, ecpg is the only one producing warnings for me. What flex version
do you use?
> It seems these are only missing prototypes. How about adding an include
> file with those prototypes?
What I get with flex 2.5.4 is
pgc.c: In function `base_yylex':
pgc.c:1564: warning: label `find_rule' defined but not used
preproc.y: At top level:
pgc.c:3818: warning: `yy_flex_realloc' defined but not used
neither of which seem fixable that way.
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> writes: >> On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 07:18:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Now if we could only get rid of those flex-induced warnings in ecpg... > >> Don't you get the same in the backend's parser code? I surely do. > > No, ecpg is the only one producing warnings for me. What flex version > do you use? > >> It seems these are only missing prototypes. How about adding an include >> file with those prototypes? > > What I get with flex 2.5.4 is > > pgc.c: In function `base_yylex': > pgc.c:1564: warning: label `find_rule' defined but not used > preproc.y: At top level: > pgc.c:3818: warning: `yy_flex_realloc' defined but not used > > neither of which seem fixable that way. I think Michael is refering to: In file included from bootparse.y:380: bootscanner.c:1855: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yyget_lineno’ bootscanner.c:1864: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yyget_in’ bootscanner.c:1872: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yyget_out’ bootscanner.c:1880: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yyget_leng’ bootscanner.c:1889: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yyget_text’ bootscanner.c:1898: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yyset_lineno’ bootscanner.c:1910: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yyset_in’ bootscanner.c:1915: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yyset_out’ bootscanner.c:1920: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yyget_debug’ bootscanner.c:1925: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yyset_debug’ bootscanner.c:1959: warning: no previous prototype for ‘boot_yylex_destroy’ In file included from gram.y:9663: scan.c:7050: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yyget_lineno’ scan.c:7059: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yyget_in’ scan.c:7067: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yyget_out’ scan.c:7075: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yyget_leng’ scan.c:7084: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yyget_text’ scan.c:7093: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yyset_lineno’ scan.c:7105: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yyset_in’ scan.c:7110: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yyset_out’ scan.c:7115: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yyget_debug’ scan.c:7120: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yyset_debug’ scan.c:7154: warning: no previous prototype for ‘base_yylex_destroy’ ... http://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=Shad&dt=2007-07-16%20053004&stg=make Stefan
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> What I get with flex 2.5.4 is
>>
>> pgc.c: In function `base_yylex':
>> pgc.c:1564: warning: label `find_rule' defined but not used
>> preproc.y: At top level:
>> pgc.c:3818: warning: `yy_flex_realloc' defined but not used
>>
>> neither of which seem fixable that way.
> I think Michael is refering to:
> In file included from bootparse.y:380:
> bootscanner.c:1855: warning: no previous prototype for=20
> =E2=80=98boot_yyget_lineno=E2=80=99
> bootscanner.c:1864: warning: no previous prototype for =E2=80=98boot_yyge=
> t_in=E2=80=99
> bootscanner.c:1872: warning: no previous prototype for =E2=80=98boot_yyge=
> t_out=E2=80=99
> bootscanner.c:1880: warning: no previous prototype for =E2=80=98boot_yyge=
> t_leng=E2=80=99
> bootscanner.c:1889: warning: no previous prototype for =E2=80=98boot_yyge=
> t_text=E2=80=99
[ shrug... ] Those are flex bugs.
regards, tom lane
On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 12:02:18PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > No, ecpg is the only one producing warnings for me. What flex version > do you use? 2.5.33 > What I get with flex 2.5.4 is > > pgc.c: In function `base_yylex': > pgc.c:1564: warning: label `find_rule' defined but not used > preproc.y: At top level: > pgc.c:3818: warning: `yy_flex_realloc' defined but not used These don't appear with my flex version. Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes@jabber.org Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 06:09:47PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > I think Michael is refering to: > > In file included from bootparse.y:380: > bootscanner.c:1855: warning: no previous prototype for > ‘boot_yyget_lineno’ > ... Right, I was talking about these messages. Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes@jabber.org Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!