> On Jan 30, 2022, at 2:41 PM, Roland Illig <roland.il...@gmx.de> wrote: > > Am 30.01.2022 um 14:21 schrieb Christos Zoulas: >> Module Name: src >> Committed By: christos >> Date: Sun Jan 30 13:21:09 UTC 2022 >> >> Modified Files: >> src/usr.bin/make: dir.c job.c make.h >> >> Log Message: >> Make the GNode lineno unsigned to fix lint warning in var.c calling >> PrintLocation() > > Hi Christos, > > Did you get that warning on i386? On x86_64 I didn't get any lint > warnings, as these would have made my pre-commit hook fail.
Yes: https://releng.netbsd.org/builds/HEAD-lint/202201300710Z/i386.build.failed <https://releng.netbsd.org/builds/HEAD-lint/202201300710Z/i386.build.failed> Do you know it would only fail on i386? > Since usr.bin/make is also used in tools/make, it needs to follow the > rules in tools/README, which say that all tools should stick to C89. > The format specifier %zu comes from C99 though. Yes, %zu is annoying because windows does not have it either (until very recently I think). But cygwin does have it(?) so there is no issue? > Or can we drop the C89 rule from tools/README? In the past few years, > usr.bin/make used several features from C99 (end-of-line comments, long > long, %zu, snprintf), and nobody cared to fix the C99-isms, so either > nobody needed the C89 restriction or we simply ignored the complaints. I think that we should ask in tech-toolchain. Yes, I prefer to require c99 at this point. Best, christos
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
