[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: max_align_t on RHEL 7.1 s390x

From: Sergio Durigan Junior
Subject: Re: max_align_t on RHEL 7.1 s390x
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 16:38:32 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)

On Wednesday, August 29 2018, Bruno Haible wrote:

> Hi Sergio,

Hello, Bruno,

Thanks for the reply.

>> I've just updated GDB's gnulib copy using a recent commit, and now I'm
>> noticing a few errors when compiling things on a RHEL 7.1 s390x system.
>> Here's what I'm getting
>>   In file included from 
>> ../../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/gnulib/import/scratch_buffer.h:9:0,
>>                    from ../../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/gnulib/import/glob.c:87:
>>   ../../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/gnulib/import/malloc/scratch_buffer.h:69:3: 
>> error: unknown type name max_align_t
> The type max_align_t is supposed to come from <stddef.h>. For this
> reason, the gnulib module 'scratch_buffer' depends on the module 'stddef'.
> The module 'stddef' works like this: If at configure time, <stddef.h> is
> found to not define max_align_t, a replacement <stddef.h> will be generated.
> Otherwise the original <stddef.h> will be used.
> GCC's <stddef.h> defines max_align_t if and only if compiling for C11
> or a newer standard.
> Please look whether you have an stddef.h file in your build tree, and if so,
> show it.

Thanks for the explanation.  I'll try to get access to the machine and
check if stddef.h is present or not in the build tree.

>>   ../../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/gnulib/import/glob.c: In function glob_in_dir:
>>   ../../../../binutils-gdb/gdb/gnulib/import/glob.c:1413:15: error: for loop 
>> initial declarations are only allowed in C99 mode
>>                  for (size_t i = 0; i < cur; ++i)
>>                  ^
> To me, it looks like
>   1) you are compiling with a GCC option that enforces the super-ancient
>      C89 or C90 mode, and

Maybe that's the case.

>   2) you added this GCC option after configuring. That is, you configured
>      with CC="gcc" and then added "-std=c89" in the Makefile. DON'T DO THIS.
>      IN THE CC OR CFLAGS VARIABLE. Otherwise configure guesses wrong.

I did not do this.  I'm aware of the CC/CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS/CPPFLAGS/LDFLAGS

> If you think this is not the case, please run configure with option "-C"
> and attach also the config.cache and config.status files.

When I get access to the machine, I'll post the results.


GPG key ID: 237A 54B1 0287 28BF 00EF  31F4 D0EB 7628 65FC 5E36
Please send encrypted e-mail if possible

reply via email to

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