[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3335

Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #6 from Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-15 18:09:37 UTC ---
ARM old-ABI support is removed and new-ABI builds OK, so I think we can take
the build problem as fixed.

However, I think source files should also include headers whose API actually
includes providing whatever definitions the source file needs.  That is, I
think adding the missing #include to libc is an obvious fix.  I'm pinging it on
libc-alpha.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3335

--- Comment #7 from Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org> 2012-02-15 18:35:22 UTC ---
i agree completely, but Ulrich gave an unequivocal "no" when i posted patches
to fix exactly that.  for example:

http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-alpha/2006-08/msg00008.html

but he's said as much in other places iirc

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[joseph at codesourcery dot com]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3335

--- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> 2012-02-15 20:43:19 UTC ---
It was agreed on libc-alpha that we do want to make this sort of change.  
I've checked this patch in.  Just because one person objects to a patch 
does not mean the final conclusion will be against putting that patch in - 
but if people assume it does and don't speak up if they support the patch 
that others oppose, then we can't avoid the opposition standing.  So 
please contribute to patch discussions if you feel you can add something 
useful.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3335

--- Comment #9 from Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org> 2012-02-16 03:08:41 UTC ---
not sure what you mean ... i challenged the rejection a few times but to no
avail (at the time).  glad it's worked out in the long run.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[joseph at codesourcery dot com]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3335

--- Comment #10 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> 2012-02-16 04:14:36 UTC ---
Many developers are now more willing than they were in 2006 not to treat a 
rejection as the last word on a patch but to seek a consensus conclusion 
from other developers instead and to commit patches on the basis of such a 
conclusion.  We now have a general answer for this kind of patch (i.e., 
source files *should* include the headers declaring things they use) 
different from the one that applied before.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2006-10-31 20:12 -------
i personally dont have the ability to directly fix either so that leaves me the
luxury of bitching about it :)

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3335

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[drow at sources dot redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From drow at sources dot redhat dot com  2006-10-31 20:07 -------
Subject: Re:  In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 08:06:19PM -0000, vapier at gentoo dot org wrote:
> ive seen this failure in a couple of ports ... i dont really care to try and
> track down the implicit include path in every one as simply including the header
> that defines MAX() in the file that uses MAX() seems a lot saner to me

One of these fixes we have the option to commit at all; the other we
don't.  I'll take building over not building any day.



-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3335

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2006-10-31 20:06 -------
ive seen this failure in a couple of ports ... i dont really care to try and
track down the implicit include path in every one as simply including the header
that defines MAX() in the file that uses MAX() seems a lot saner to me

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3335

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[drow at sources dot redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From drow at sources dot redhat dot com  2006-10-31 16:05 -------
Or perhaps you could add whatever the missing #include is, as Ulrich suggested,
and we could fix it in ports, and just stop worrying about it?

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |drow at sources dot redhat
                   |                            |dot com


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3335

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug ports/3335] In function `__getcwd': undefined reference to `MAX'

[vapier at gentoo dot org]

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2006-10-13 19:24 -------
dupe of Bug 2929 ... but perhaps we can get this fixed properly instead of
simply duping it and ignoring the issue ...

http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2006-06/msg00068.html

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |vapier at gentoo dot org


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3335

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.