Control: severity -1 important
Control: severity 1111514 important
Control: merge -1 1111514
Control: tags -1 + upstream fixed-upstream

TL;DR: to fix, please update to the latest 6.5.X release. 6.5.0 has fixed this bug (configure.ac test case b0rked) by removing the broken check, it was for ancient systems.

See also https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1111514

Ubuntu found the same issue, I will just paste what I wrote there in https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fetchmail/+bug/2120850

Time to update fetchmail. Questing isn't LTS, so the best time to update is now. You're building 6.4.39, fetchmail is at release 6.5.4, and 6.5.0 has fixed this particular issue.

The reason is one of the configure checks no longer works with modern compilers (arguably the test code was ill-formed but older compilers didn't assume that T f() was T f(void), probably because they operated for older language standards by default), and breaks if the compiler defaults -std to c23 or equivalent or newer (tested with clang and GCC).

configure:11620: checking use of void pointer type
configure:11636: gcc -c -g -O2 conftest.c >&5
conftest.c: In function 'main':
conftest.c:98:18: error: too many arguments to function 'xmalloc'; expected 0, have 1
   98 | p = (char *) xmalloc(1);
      | ^~~~~~~ ~
conftest.c:97:11: note: declared here
   97 | void *xmalloc();
      | ^~~~~~~
configure:11636: $? = 1

and that leaves the HAVE_VOIDPOINTER undefined in config.h, causing the mismatch. It was an attemped workaround for antediluvian systems, which are EOL or extinct now.

Apparently your cc/gcc/clang is newer than fetchmail... 6.4.X was C89 stuff.
6.5.X is C99 stuff and compiles fine in C23 (at least in gnu23) mode.

Note that fetchmail 6.4.X versions are no longer supported. I am not suggesting workarounds for those. You're on your own. Let me know if the newest 6.5.X gives you troubles. It follows a stable-branch approach where patches on the same MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH version are compatible and are usually applicable even by conservative distros.

Regards,
Matthias

Reply via email to