Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Terry Lambert writes: : If cross-compilation actually worked, the people causing : the problems for the Alpha would be able to test the : build, with only their x86 hardware. I think that's why you are seeing so many people trying to make it work :-) Warner To Uns

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Absolutely. People *are* working on getting that fixed. On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Terry Lambert wrote: > Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > Yes, I've actually been massaging a few of those- glad somebody's on > > it. I'll come on out to Concord if you you need a hand It's > > sometimes hard to keep -

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Matthew Jacob wrote: > > Yes, I've actually been massaging a few of those- glad somebody's on > it. I'll come on out to Concord if you you need a hand It's > sometimes hard to keep -current up on an alpha long enough for a > complete buildworld If cross-compilation actually worked, the p

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 8 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > My -DNOPERL build broke in games/fortune in the "building everything" > > phase because the Alpha compiler tried to use the i386 strfile.o that > > was left over from the bootstrap phase. > This shouldn't happe

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On 8 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Mark Peek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > It probably works since i386 and pc98 are similar. I'm trying an alpha > > cross build as we speak. So far I needed to apply this patch to get > > around having -mcpu=ev4 being fed to the i386 compiler during th

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Mark Peek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It probably works since i386 and pc98 are similar. I'm trying an alpha > cross build as we speak. So far I needed to apply this patch to get > around having -mcpu=ev4 being fed to the i386 compiler during the > build tools phase. My -DNOPERL build broke in

Cross compiling (was Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems)

[cc's trimed] In message Mark Peek writes: : It probably works since i386 and pc98 are similar. I'm trying an : alpha cross build as we speak. So far I needed to apply this patch to : get around having -mcpu=ev4 being fed to the i386 compiler during the

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

At 1:49 PM -0600 7/8/01, Warner Losh wrote: >In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "David O'Brien" writes: >: On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:03:26PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: >: > Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >: > > [explaining how to build an LP64 world on i386] >: > >: > I just had a maj

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "David O'Brien" writes: : On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:03:26PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: : > Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : > > [explaining how to build an LP64 world on i386] : > : > I just had a major "doh" moment... : > : > # cd /usr/src : > # m

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 07:03:26PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [explaining how to build an LP64 world on i386] > > I just had a major "doh" moment... > > # cd /usr/src > # make MACHINE_ARCH=alpha buildworld >& /var/log/world.alpha & > [1] 13655

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [explaining how to build an LP64 world on i386] I just had a major "doh" moment... # cd /usr/src # make MACHINE_ARCH=alpha buildworld >& /var/log/world.alpha & [1] 13655 Ought to catch any Alpha WARNS fuckups. Or did I overlook something? DES -- Dag-

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:02:28PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:54:26AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrot

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On 8 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > "David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > OR build a 64-bit long (LP64) x86 gcc and test compile with that also. > > BDE found *lots* of 64-bit dirty code using this technique. > > Mind revealing how that's done? Compiling [g]cc with -DLONG_TYPE

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

"David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > OR build a 64-bit long (LP64) x86 gcc and test compile with that also. > BDE found *lots* of 64-bit dirty code using this technique. Mind revealing how that's done? DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't know what clock_t is used for (kernel version of time_t?). It was invented by the ANSI/ISO C committee to represent CPU time. Hardly anything uses it. John -- John Polstra

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

> > I don't know what clock_t is used for (kernel version of time_t?). > But the general agreement was to leave time as a 32-bit value on the > Alpha in order to match (1) FreeBSD/i386 and (2) OSF/1,Digital Unix,Tru64. > okay, okay, end the thread... To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTEC

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 01:02:28PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:54:26AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 03:08:04PM +1000, P

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:54:26AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 03:08:04PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: > > > > i386 type Alpha type > > > > clock

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Sat, Jul 07, 2001 at 11:54:26AM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 03:08:04PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: > > > i386 type Alpha type > > > clock_t unsigned long int > > > > We could make these th

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Sat, 7 Jul 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 03:08:04PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: > > i386 type Alpha type > > clock_t unsigned long int > > We could make these the same (not sure why they aren't). because on alpha long == 64 bits > > > p

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 07:40:59AM -0700, Mark Peek wrote: > I had the same idea last night. I modified my PowerPC cross-compiler > "port" to produce an Alpha version. This is based on the lang/gcc295 > port so it contains the FreeBSD patches for things like -Wformat. For > sake of example, I o

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 04:37:43PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: > >On i386, 'gcc -fsyntax-only -Wall x.c' produces no error. On > >NetBSD/alpha (same compiler, really), this produces: > > > >x.c: In function `func': > >x.c:4: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size > > > >It'd be *re

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 03:08:04PM +1000, Peter Jeremy wrote: > i386 type Alpha type > clock_t unsigned long int We could make these the same (not sure why they aren't). > ptrdiff_t int long > size_tunsigned intunsigned long > ssize

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 07:13:20PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > Yes, people need to be more careful when enabling WARNS and not do it > until they've positively tested it on alpha. OR build a 64-bit long (LP64) x86 gcc and test compile with that also. BDE found *lots* of 64-bit dirty code using

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 06:59:27PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > "David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > People are making more and more mistakes that break the Alpha build. > > We will soon have two more arches. > > ...which won't really make much difference, as 99% of the differen

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

"David O'Brien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > People are making more and more mistakes that break the Alpha build. > We will soon have two more arches. ...which won't really make much difference, as 99% of the difference in userland code is integer and pointer sizes, so for all practical purposes

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Yes! On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Mark Peek wrote: > At 4:37 PM +1000 7/6/01, Peter Jeremy wrote: > >Another random thought: If it was easier to build/install a > >cross-platform version of gcc, it might be easier to convince > >developers to at least check that compiling on different platforms > >wor

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

At 4:37 PM +1000 7/6/01, Peter Jeremy wrote: >Another random thought: If it was easier to build/install a >cross-platform version of gcc, it might be easier to convince >developers to at least check that compiling on different platforms >works before committing. Peter, I had the same idea last n

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

> >On i386, 'gcc -fsyntax-only -Wall x.c' produces no error. On > >NetBSD/alpha (same compiler, really), this produces: > > > >x.c: In function `func': > >x.c:4: warning: cast from pointer to integer of different size > > > >It'd be *really* nice if we could add a flag where such errors could be

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On 2001-Jul-05 22:22:11 -0700, Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> IMHO, the problem splits into two categories: >> Firstly, sizeof(long) (and sizeof(void *)) differ between the Alpha >> and the i386. > >Yes. This tends to be caught by the alpha compiler but the i386. >It'd be nice if t

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

> Actually, the growing realization (at least to me) that the problem > probably cannot be solved except via software tools, unless the FreeBSD > community gets more like the NetBSD community in terms of awareness- > which can only happen if it happens. > > I don't know how you feel about it, but

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Fri, 6 Jul 2001, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2001-Jul-05 20:31:43 -0700, Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Perhaps what we really need- and this is really a toolchain issues- is a > >compiler that is just as stringent on i386 as on alpha? > > IMHO, the compiler _is_ just as stringent

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On 2001-Jul-05 20:31:43 -0700, Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Perhaps what we really need- and this is really a toolchain issues- is a >compiler that is just as stringent on i386 as on alpha? IMHO, the compiler _is_ just as stringent on i386 as Alpha (it's the same compiler). IMHO, th

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, GH wrote: > > > I have to laugh. Sorry if you don't that helps. S'long then. I've no > > > more time for the likes of you. > > > > *rolls eyes* Man, some people are hard to work in a team with. > > You guys are still trying to pass this off as a team?? > *boggle* > > gh

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

> > I have to laugh. Sorry if you don't that helps. S'long then. I've no > > more time for the likes of you. > > *rolls eyes* Man, some people are hard to work in a team with. You guys are still trying to pass this off as a team?? *boggle* gh (Yeah yeah, unproductive..but what part of this th

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 09:41:21PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > Did you read my other mails? I doesn't appear that you have. Or you > > didn't understand them. I was laughing because, yes, WARNS was turned on > > prematurely which killed things.

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 09:41:21PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > Did you read my other mails? I doesn't appear that you have. Or you > didn't understand them. I was laughing because, yes, WARNS was turned on > prematurely which killed things. Well, your email didn't translate well, because it ca

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 08:07:40PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > > > Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just so

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 08:07:40PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > > Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to > > > be worked out since warnings were

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Perhaps what we really need- and this is really a toolchain issues- is a compiler that is just as stringent on i386 as on alpha? I dunno- there used to be a flag to lint that would worn about non-portable size casts. Is there a gcc flag that would cover most of the heavy lifting for this on i386

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to > > be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently. > > What problems? There shouldn't be any fatalities

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to > be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently. > > - Jordan > > From: Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems > Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:17:51 -07

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 05:49:56PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 12:12:22AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > This kind of language isn't called for. People make mistakes, and > > insulting them for it serves no useful purpose. > > People are making more and more mistakes t

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 05:38:31PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > What is so hard with ``make -m /home/kris/mk''? That's actually not one of the hoops you need to jump through on beast -- I think I got someone to install the new mk files already. The main hoops are related to stale /usr/include

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On 06-Jul-01 Dima Dorfman wrote: >> In the WARNS= case, another >> workable method would be to commit the warning fixes but don't commit the >> actual WARNS= change until the build has been verified on all archs. > > This doesn't work. The point of WARNS, as I see it anyway, is not to > scrub t

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 06:54:45PM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote: > > Matt Jacob usually steps in and fixes breakages on the alpha. At the minimum, > > people should be either testing the build on all archs, or asking for someone > > else to review the patch on archs they don't have available (this

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 06:00:25PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 05-Jul-01 Kris Kennaway wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > >> Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to > >> be worked out since warnings were made fatal rece

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On 06-Jul-01 Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > Well, unless implicit pointer-to-int conversions have suddenly become > > fatal, it blew up on something that just got fixed (I went to commit > > the fix and found that someone else had already done so in the las

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On 06-Jul-01 Jordan Hubbard wrote: > Well, unless implicit pointer-to-int conversions have suddenly become > fatal, it blew up on something that just got fixed (I went to commit > the fix and found that someone else had already done so in the last 12 > hours). The world build has been restarted

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On 05-Jul-01 Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: >> Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to >> be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently. > > What problems? There shouldn't be any fatalities from warnin

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 16:22:27 -0700 > On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to > > be worked out

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 12:12:22AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > This kind of language isn't called for. People make mistakes, and > insulting them for it serves no useful purpose. People are making more and more mistakes that break the Alpha build. We will soon have two more arches. We need to

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 08:53:59AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > Not normal, except by dimwits who add WARNS?= 2 w/o checking. > > Now, would it really have been so hard to just send (or even commit) a > patch that declares len as a size_t rather than an unsigned int, > instead of calling

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 02:17:51PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > David claimed he would upgrade beast at some point- but he's pretty > busy. Acutally out of the state on a WRS forced "vacation". :-( > 1. If I had the authority to do so, I'd drive over to Concord and do it. > I can do that next

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:12:22PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to > be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently. What problems? There shouldn't be any fatalities from warnings unless people have marked something with

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Since David's busy, I'm working on it now. Just some build issues to be worked out since warnings were made fatal recently. - Jordan From: Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 14:17:51 -0700 (PDT) > >

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

David claimed he would upgrade beast at some point- but he's pretty busy. 1. If I had the authority to do so, I'd drive over to Concord and do it. I can do that next week some time. 2. If I had > 144KBit DSL, I'd pay the extra power bills and leave up a PC164 at Feral all the time for people to

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 11:00:09AM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > it's just the same old same old refrain of "beast is broken" or > > "oh well", etc. etc. etc but yer right, insulting does no > > good. > > > > I beg too much hard cider at din

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Wed, Jul 04, 2001 at 09:54:50AM +0200, some SMTP stream spewed forth: > Gentlemen, > > Please? I will happily supply you with ample quantities of quality > Dutch mud to sling at one another. But please do so in private? But think of the money we'll save on wrestling tickets. gh > > tnx >

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Gentlemen, Please? I will happily supply you with ample quantities of quality Dutch mud to sling at one another. But please do so in private? tnx Wilko > Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> There is, in my mailbox, a grotesque and unforgiveable insult from you >> from some months back.

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

> > > There is no -Wall or -Werror in normal /usr/src builds. Try again. > > > > Sorry- let me modify that. > > > > Not normal, except by dimwits who add WARNS?= 2 w/o checking. > > This kind of language isn't called for. People make mistakes, and > insulting them for it serves no useful purp

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 09:34:10PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > S> > > are on for is the kernel- and even that isn't -Werror. > > > > > > You're about two months out of date; we started locking down userland > > > > > code around that timeframe. This one probably wasn't tested > > > thorou

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On 4 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > There is, in my mailbox, a grotesque and unforgiveable insult from you > > from some months back. You deserve no respect whatsoever. > > Heh. You're so cute. *smooch* to you too, sweetie! To Unsubsc

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Oh- btw- let's change the tenor of this slightly: I apologize to Dag-Erling for calling him a dimwit. On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > On 4 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > > Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Too much frickin' ergot in yer wheaties, b

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > There is, in my mailbox, a grotesque and unforgiveable insult from you > from some months back. You deserve no respect whatsoever. Heh. You're so cute. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] wi

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On 4 Jul 2001, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Matthew Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Too much frickin' ergot in yer wheaties, bucko. > > > > > > There is no -Wall or -Werror in normal /usr/src builds. Try again. > > > > Sorry- let me modify that. > > > > Not normal, except by dimwits

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

S> > > are on for is the kernel- and even that isn't -Werror. > > > > You're about two months out of date; we started locking down userland > > > code around that timeframe. This one probably wasn't tested > > thoroughly enough on alpha. > > Too much frickin' ergot in yer wheaties, bucko. >

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 02:41:33PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > Hmm. Somebody must have cranked some C compilation up enough to turn > > warnings into errors. > > > > If I check out chkgrp into /tmp now on a system that's currently trying > >

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 02:41:33PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > Hmm. Somebody must have cranked some C compilation up enough to turn > warnings into errors. > > If I check out chkgrp into /tmp now on a system that's currently trying > to update itself, I get: > > yorp.feral.com > make > Warn

Re: chgrp broken on alpha systems

Hmm. Somebody must have cranked some C compilation up enough to turn warnings into errors. If I check out chkgrp into /tmp now on a system that's currently trying to update itself, I get: yorp.feral.com > make Warning: Object directory not changed from original /tmp/src/usr.sbin/chkgrp cc -O -p

chgrp broken on alpha systems

The current version go chkgrp does not compile under alpha systems grep FreeBSD chkgrp.c "$FreeBSD: src/usr.sbin/chkgrp/chkgrp.c,v 1.5 2001/06/24 12:38:28 des Exp $"; ===> usr.sbin/chkgrp cc -nostdinc -O -pipe -mcpu=ev4 -mcpu=ev4 -I/usr/obj/usr/src/alpha/usr/include -W -Wall -Wstrict-proto