Thread: Warning compiling pg_dump (MinGW, Windows XP)
Hello, Pgsql-hackers.
I'm getting such warnings:
pg_dump.c: In function 'dumpSequence':
pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format
pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: too many arguments for format
pg_dump.c:11450:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format
pg_dump.c:11450:2: warning: too many arguments for format
Line numbers my not be the same in the official sources, because I've
made some changes. But the lines are:
snprintf(bufm, sizeof(bufm), INT64_FORMAT, SEQ_MINVALUE); snprintf(bufx, sizeof(bufx), INT64_FORMAT,
SEQ_MAXVALUE);
In my oppinion configure failed for MinGw+Windows in this case. Am I
right? Can someone give me a hint how to avoid this?
Thanks in advance
--
With best wishes,Pavel mailto:pavel@gf.microolap.com
2011/1/13 Pavel Golub <pavel@microolap.com>: > Hello, Pgsql-hackers. > > I'm getting such warnings: > > pg_dump.c: In function 'dumpSequence': > pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format > pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: too many arguments for format > pg_dump.c:11450:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format > pg_dump.c:11450:2: warning: too many arguments for format > > Line numbers my not be the same in the official sources, because I've > made some changes. But the lines are: > > snprintf(bufm, sizeof(bufm), INT64_FORMAT, SEQ_MINVALUE); > snprintf(bufx, sizeof(bufx), INT64_FORMAT, SEQ_MAXVALUE); > > In my oppinion configure failed for MinGw+Windows in this case. Am I > right? Can someone give me a hint how to avoid this? It seems like PGAC_FUNC_SNPRINTF_LONG_LONG_INT_FORMAT is getting the wrong answer on your machine, though I'm not sure why. The easiest workaround is probably to run configure and then edit src/include/pg_config.h before compiling. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Hello, Robert. You wrote: RH> 2011/1/13 Pavel Golub <pavel@microolap.com>: >> Hello, Pgsql-hackers. >> >> I'm getting such warnings: >> >> pg_dump.c: In function 'dumpSequence': >> pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format >> pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: too many arguments for format >> pg_dump.c:11450:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format >> pg_dump.c:11450:2: warning: too many arguments for format >> >> Line numbers my not be the same in the official sources, because I've >> made some changes. But the lines are: >> >> snprintf(bufm, sizeof(bufm), INT64_FORMAT, SEQ_MINVALUE); >> snprintf(bufx, sizeof(bufx), INT64_FORMAT, SEQ_MAXVALUE); >> >> In my oppinion configure failed for MinGw+Windows in this case. Am I >> right? Can someone give me a hint how to avoid this? RH> It seems like PGAC_FUNC_SNPRINTF_LONG_LONG_INT_FORMAT is getting the RH> wrong answer on your machine, though I'm not sure why. The easiest RH> workaround is probably to run configure and then edit RH> src/include/pg_config.h before compiling. Thanks Robert. What value should I enter for this option? -- With best wishes,Pavel mailto:pavel@gf.microolap.com
On 01/17/2011 05:54 AM, Pavel Golub wrote: > Hello, Robert. > > You wrote: > > RH> 2011/1/13 Pavel Golub<pavel@microolap.com>: >>> Hello, Pgsql-hackers. >>> >>> I'm getting such warnings: >>> >>> pg_dump.c: In function 'dumpSequence': >>> pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format >>> pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: too many arguments for format >>> pg_dump.c:11450:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format >>> pg_dump.c:11450:2: warning: too many arguments for format >>> >>> Line numbers my not be the same in the official sources, because I've >>> made some changes. But the lines are: >>> >>> snprintf(bufm, sizeof(bufm), INT64_FORMAT, SEQ_MINVALUE); >>> snprintf(bufx, sizeof(bufx), INT64_FORMAT, SEQ_MAXVALUE); >>> >>> In my oppinion configure failed for MinGw+Windows in this case. Am I >>> right? Can someone give me a hint how to avoid this? > RH> It seems like PGAC_FUNC_SNPRINTF_LONG_LONG_INT_FORMAT is getting the > RH> wrong answer on your machine, though I'm not sure why. The easiest > RH> workaround is probably to run configure and then edit > RH> src/include/pg_config.h before compiling. > > Thanks Robert. What value should I enter for this option? Mingw has always had a huge number of format warnings. See for example <http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=frogmouth&dt=2011-01-17%2007%3A30%3A00&stg=make> If someone wants to fix them that would be good, but I'm not sure it's a simple task. There's probably some discussion of it in the archives back when we first did the Windows port. cheers andrew
Hello, Andrew. You wrote: AD> On 01/17/2011 05:54 AM, Pavel Golub wrote: >> Hello, Robert. >> >> You wrote: >> >> RH> 2011/1/13 Pavel Golub<pavel@microolap.com>: >>>> Hello, Pgsql-hackers. >>>> >>>> I'm getting such warnings: >>>> >>>> pg_dump.c: In function 'dumpSequence': >>>> pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format >>>> pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: too many arguments for format >>>> pg_dump.c:11450:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format >>>> pg_dump.c:11450:2: warning: too many arguments for format >>>> >>>> Line numbers my not be the same in the official sources, because I've >>>> made some changes. But the lines are: >>>> >>>> snprintf(bufm, sizeof(bufm), INT64_FORMAT, SEQ_MINVALUE); >>>> snprintf(bufx, sizeof(bufx), INT64_FORMAT, SEQ_MAXVALUE); >>>> >>>> In my oppinion configure failed for MinGw+Windows in this case. Am I >>>> right? Can someone give me a hint how to avoid this? >> RH> It seems like PGAC_FUNC_SNPRINTF_LONG_LONG_INT_FORMAT is getting the >> RH> wrong answer on your machine, though I'm not sure why. The easiest >> RH> workaround is probably to run configure and then edit >> RH> src/include/pg_config.h before compiling. >> >> Thanks Robert. What value should I enter for this option? AD> Mingw has always had a huge number of format warnings. See for example AD> <http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=frogmouth&dt=2011-01-17%2007%3A30%3A00&stg=make> So you think I should just ignore these warnings? Because I can't remember the same behaviour on 8.x branches... AD> If someone wants to fix them that would be good, but I'm not sure it's a AD> simple task. There's probably some discussion of it in the archives back AD> when we first did the Windows port. AD> cheers AD> andrew -- With best wishes,Pavel mailto:pavel@gf.microolap.com
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 5:54 AM, Pavel Golub <pavel@microolap.com> wrote: > RH> It seems like PGAC_FUNC_SNPRINTF_LONG_LONG_INT_FORMAT is getting the > RH> wrong answer on your machine, though I'm not sure why. The easiest > RH> workaround is probably to run configure and then edit > RH> src/include/pg_config.h before compiling. > > Thanks Robert. What value should I enter for this option? Not sure. I notice that the configure test has this comment: # PGAC_FUNC_SNPRINTF_LONG_LONG_INT_FORMAT # --------------------------------------- # Determine which format snprintf uses for long long int. We handle # %lld, %qd, %I64d. The result is in shell variable # LONG_LONG_INT_FORMAT. # # MinGW uses '%I64d', though gcc throws an warning with -Wall, # while '%lld' doesn't generate a warning, but doesn't work. # ...and the values the test actually tries are: %lld %qd %I64d -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On 01/17/2011 07:18 AM, Pavel Golub wrote: > > AD> Mingw has always had a huge number of format warnings. See for example > AD> <http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=frogmouth&dt=2011-01-17%2007%3A30%3A00&stg=make> > > So you think I should just ignore these warnings? Because I can't > remember the same behaviour on 8.x branches... > > We've had them all along, as I said. See <http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=frogmouth&dt=2011-01-04%2023%3A54%3A16&stg=make> for the same thing in an 8.2 build. cheers andre
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> 2011/1/13 Pavel Golub <pavel@microolap.com>:
>> pg_dump.c: In function 'dumpSequence':
>> pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format
>> pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: too many arguments for format
> It seems like PGAC_FUNC_SNPRINTF_LONG_LONG_INT_FORMAT is getting the
> wrong answer on your machine, though I'm not sure why.
That configure check tests whether snprintf produces the right result at
runtime. It doesn't check whether the compiler will generate a warning
about it. It looks to me like Pavel has a compiler that is out of sync
with his libc; which is a platform configuration mistake that he needs
to fix.
Another possibility is that configure chose to not use the system
snprintf at all, in which case %lld is the correct syntax to use but gcc
might well have some different expectation. Without seeing the
config.log results it's hard to be sure about that one; but in any case
it's hard to credit that there are any modern machines where snprintf
can't handle long long int, so this still suggests a platform problem.
regards, tom lane
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > On 01/17/2011 07:18 AM, Pavel Golub wrote: >> So you think I should just ignore these warnings? Because I can't >> remember the same behaviour on 8.x branches... > We've had them all along, as I said. See > <http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=frogmouth&dt=2011-01-04%2023%3A54%3A16&stg=make> > for the same thing in an 8.2 build. I wonder why mingw's gcc is complaining about %m when other versions of gcc do not? If you can't get it to shut up about that, there's not going to be much percentage in silencing warnings about %lld. regards, tom lane
On 01/17/2011 03:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net> writes: >> On 01/17/2011 07:18 AM, Pavel Golub wrote: >>> So you think I should just ignore these warnings? Because I can't >>> remember the same behaviour on 8.x branches... >> We've had them all along, as I said. See >> <http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=frogmouth&dt=2011-01-04%2023%3A54%3A16&stg=make> >> for the same thing in an 8.2 build. > I wonder why mingw's gcc is complaining about %m when other versions of > gcc do not? If you can't get it to shut up about that, there's not > going to be much percentage in silencing warnings about %lld. > > We could add -Wno-format to the flags. That makes it shut up, but maybe we don't want to use such a sledgehammer. cheers andrew
Hello, Tom. You wrote: TL> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: >> 2011/1/13 Pavel Golub <pavel@microolap.com>: >>> pg_dump.c: In function 'dumpSequence': >>> pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: unknown conversion type character 'l' in format >>> pg_dump.c:11449:2: warning: too many arguments for format >> It seems like PGAC_FUNC_SNPRINTF_LONG_LONG_INT_FORMAT is getting the >> wrong answer on your machine, though I'm not sure why. TL> That configure check tests whether snprintf produces the right result at TL> runtime. It doesn't check whether the compiler will generate a warning TL> about it. It looks to me like Pavel has a compiler that is out of sync TL> with his libc; which is a platform configuration mistake that he needs TL> to fix. The thing is that for this test I used a clean virtual machine under WinXP with only one MinGW + MSYS installed. TL> Another possibility is that configure chose to not use the system TL> snprintf at all, in which case %lld is the correct syntax to use but gcc TL> might well have some different expectation. Without seeing the TL> config.log results it's hard to be sure about that one; but in any case TL> it's hard to credit that there are any modern machines where snprintf TL> can't handle long long int, so this still suggests a platform problem. config.log attached TL> regards, tom lane -- With best wishes, Pavel mailto:pavel@gf.microolap.com
Attachment
Hello, Andrew. You wrote: AD> On 01/17/2011 03:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net> writes: >>> On 01/17/2011 07:18 AM, Pavel Golub wrote: >>>> So you think I should just ignore these warnings? Because I can't >>>> remember the same behaviour on 8.x branches... >>> We've had them all along, as I said. See >>> <http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=frogmouth&dt=2011-01-04%2023%3A54%3A16&stg=make> >>> for the same thing in an 8.2 build. >> I wonder why mingw's gcc is complaining about %m when other versions of >> gcc do not? If you can't get it to shut up about that, there's not >> going to be much percentage in silencing warnings about %lld. >> >> AD> We could add -Wno-format to the flags. That makes it shut up, but maybe AD> we don't want to use such a sledgehammer. I want to understand the only thing. Are these warnings really dangerous? Or I should just ignore them? AD> cheers AD> andrew -- With best wishes,Pavel mailto:pavel@gf.microolap.com
On 01/18/2011 04:40 AM, Pavel Golub wrote: > > AD> We could add -Wno-format to the flags. That makes it shut up, but maybe > AD> we don't want to use such a sledgehammer. > > I want to understand the only thing. Are these warnings really > dangerous? Or I should just ignore them? > > As I pointed out previously, we have had these warnings for years and years. I am not aware of a single issue that has been reported as arising from them. cheers andrew