[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: darwin, gcc, and static inline

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: darwin, gcc, and static inline
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 11:49:28 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0

On 12/12/12 11:21, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote:
> Can you please instead just '#define _DONT_USE_CTYPE_INLINE_ 1'

I had considered that, but unfortunately as I understand it
we'd still have problems when compiling C code
with GCC in the now-typical case where _FORTIFY_SOURCE > 0,
because in that case <secure/_string.h> misuses static inline
in the same way when implementing memcpy etc.

I suppose one option would be to put this into config.h:

  #ifdef __APPLE__
  # define _DONT_USE_CTYPE_INLINE_ 1
  # define _FORTIFY_SOURCE 0

but it's pretty drastic to disable Fortify, and I'd rather
not do that.

I'll CC: this to bug-gnulib to give Gnulibers a heads-up
on these suggestions -- maybe someone else who's
an OS X expert can think of a better workaround.

In the long run, I hope Apple fixes the bugs (as they're clearly
violations of the C99 standard) and I hope that there
will be a way for gnulib to detect that the bugs have been fixed
so that it can stop using the current workaround.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]