bug-gnulib
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH] Fix check for pthreads.h pollution on Mingw64


From: Daniel P. Berrange
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix check for pthreads.h pollution on Mingw64
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:55:31 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 05:44:22PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> A previous commit attempted to workaround pollution in the
> Mingw64 pthreads.h header file
> 
>   commit d5fec6c22f03c6a73d62260c9ce091c10c0a9cbd
>   Author: Eric Blake <address@hidden>
>   Date:   Wed Jan 22 20:39:45 2014 -0700
> 
>     pthread: work around winpthread header pollution on mingw
> 
> It activated its workaround based on existance of the strtok_r
> wrapper in pthreads.h As luck would have it, latest Mingw64
> headers removed the strtok_r wrapper from pthreads.h, but left
> all the others. So the gnulib workaround was not activated.
> 
> Change the configure check to look for any of the broken
> wrappers, instead of just strtok_r

Actually, on closer inspection of winpthreads, I'm not convinced
that we should include this patch in gnulib.

For unknown reasons, Fedora 21 is currently shipping a point in
time GIT snapshot of mingw64, instead of any official release.

Only this particular point in time snapshot is broken. If I update
Fedora to a newer GIT snapshot, then the problem goes away entirely
as Mingw64 developers have removed all these nasty hacks from their
pthread.h file.

eg, this mingw64 commit fixes things.

  commit b9441743adffcb21f139c25ebc14dc7301d8869a
  Author: martell <address@hidden>
  Date:   Sat Oct 18 22:45:38 2014 +0100

    winpthreads: removed legacy time functions from pthread.h
    
    Remove localtime_r from pthread.h which was a legacy hack for
    compatibility with pthreads-win32. time.h is a more correct place for
    localtime*, both for _POSIX compliance
    <http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/localtime.html>
    and MS for compatibility
    <http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bf12f0hc(v=vs.80).aspx>
    
    Signed-off-by: Jonathan Yong <address@hidden>


I think we just need to ask Fedora 21 maintainers to update their GIT
snapshot to a non-broken one.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|



reply via email to

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