Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> According to Jim Meyering on 6/2/2008 3:11 PM:
> |> Sounds like a 'make syntax-check' rule on top of this patch would be
> |> worthwhile, although I didn't tackle that...
> |
> | I did it with this, after normalizing all existing uses:
>
> But you introduced warnings in the process:
>
> nice.c: In function `main':
> nice.c:129: warning: assignment discards qualifiers from pointer target type
>
> Here, the gnulib progname module could be advantageous
> (get_full_program_name would avoid the need to cast or to change the type
> of fake_argv).
Thanks for reporting that.
Two other people did, too ;-)
I'm looking at this patch and waiting for "make distcheck" to finish:
>From 47c4c83ac644aaed87ae62e51743b8628ed5c442 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 07:57:31 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] nice.c: avoid just-introduced compiler warning
* src/nice.c (program_name): Remove "const" in this one case,
to avoid the warning it introduced.
---
src/nice.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/nice.c b/src/nice.c
index 3981a71..03e9e6a 100644
--- a/src/nice.c
+++ b/src/nice.c
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@
#endif
/* The name this program was run with. */
-char const *program_name;
+char *program_name;
static struct option const longopts[] =
{
--
1.5.6.rc0.54.gf71a2
_______________________________________________
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
