From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-stable-return-368-listarch-libc-stable=sourceware.org@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 102526 invoked by alias); 7 Sep 2017 19:30:44 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-stable-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:libc-stable@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-stable-help@sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-stable-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-stable/>
Sender: libc-stable-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 102472 invoked by uid 89); 7 Sep 2017 19:30:39 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.99.2 on sourceware.org
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*MI:mid, H*M:mid
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on sourceware.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients
X-HELO: albireo.enyo.de
Received: from albireo.enyo.de (HELO albireo.enyo.de) (5.158.152.32) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 19:30:25 +0000
Received: from [172.17.203.2] (helo=deneb.enyo.de)	by albireo.enyo.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)	id 1dq2VB-0003jc-9j; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 21:30:13 +0200
Received: from fw by deneb.enyo.de with local (Exim 4.89)	(envelope-from <fw@deneb.enyo.de>)	id 1dq2VB-0005cp-5T; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 21:30:13 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>,  Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,  GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,  Libc-stable Mailing List <libc-stable@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Get rid of duplicate const declaration specifier warning in tst-resolv-qtypes.c.
References: <8d30c0c3-0b00-fc08-8e49-811aec114ef9@linux.vnet.ibm.com>	<878tpry1ce.fsf@linux-m68k.org>	<4c0d8778-916b-43d4-3206-2653f3696390@linux.vnet.ibm.com>	<20170224095709.GA4243@altlinux.org>	<CAMe9rOqmd0sDjrNCoHeguu+qT5h2CwBB9VvK9wOuJu7EBqPH=A@mail.gmail.com>	<956dda0f-fd50-f940-f69b-5f22b7237215@cs.ucla.edu>	<CAMe9rOphx7XWqCBT3N72JywsGHbvz+UZNACMnPu2Tjsg_F8=fQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2017 00:00:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOphx7XWqCBT3N72JywsGHbvz+UZNACMnPu2Tjsg_F8=fQ@mail.gmail.com>	(H. J. Lu's message of "Thu, 7 Sep 2017 10:42:31 -0700")
Message-ID: <87y3pqjohm.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2017-09/txt/msg00026.txt.bz2

* H. J. Lu:

> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
>> H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
>>> -static const const char *domain = "www.example.com";
>>> +static const char * const domain = "www.example.com";
>>
>>
>> Why not:
>>
>> static const char domain[] = "www.example.com";
>>
>> instead, before you backport?  It's simpler and less confusing.
>
> If we want to do this, it should go into master branch first and
> backport it 2.26 branch before putting in 2.25 branch.    Should
> we do it?

I have no objections.