From: Eric Gallager <egall@gwmail.gwu.edu>
To: rep.dot.nop@gmail.com
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/fputs.c: Define _GNU_SOURCE
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 01:57:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMfHzOv+ok31V=4z0i=jRXgFpwm-TdrdmP6xHT4105JkEuZ2eA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <EC3510AB-0131-4688-8C68-BB73D09BFDA4@gmail.com>
On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 4:03 PM <rep.dot.nop@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 22 October 2023 21:45:12 CEST, Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >On 10/22/23 10:09, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> >> On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 12:47 AM Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Current glibc headers only declare fputs_unlocked for _GNU_SOURCE.
> >>> Defining the macro avoids an implicit function declaration.
> >>
> >> This does not help targets that don't use glibc though.
> >> Note for builtins testsuite there is a lib-fputs.c file which will
> >> define a fputs_unlock which is how it will link even if the libc does
> >> not define a fputs_unlock.
> >But isn't fputs_unlocked glibc specific to begin with? ie, the test really doesn't make sense AFAICT on non-glibc targets.
>
> I think uClibc had it too, at least at one point in the past.
>
gnulib has these portability notes about fputs_unlocked:
https://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/manual/html_node/fputs_005funlocked.html
Unfortunately, it only lists the platforms that *don't* have it, not
the ones that *do* have it, so I'm afraid its notes aren't actually
that helpful after all... oh well, never mind...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-23 5:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-22 7:47 Florian Weimer
2023-10-22 13:44 ` Jeff Law
2023-10-22 16:09 ` Andrew Pinski
2023-10-22 19:45 ` Jeff Law
2023-10-22 20:02 ` rep.dot.nop
2023-10-23 5:57 ` Eric Gallager [this message]
2023-10-23 8:39 ` Florian Weimer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAMfHzOv+ok31V=4z0i=jRXgFpwm-TdrdmP6xHT4105JkEuZ2eA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=egall@gwmail.gwu.edu \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=pinskia@gmail.com \
--cc=rep.dot.nop@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).