diff options
| -rwxr-xr-x | Configure | 49 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Cross/cflags-cross-arm | 16 | ||||
| -rwxr-xr-x | cflags.SH | 89 |
3 files changed, 78 insertions, 76 deletions
@@ -4665,6 +4665,55 @@ case "$gccversion" in esac esac +# Really old versions of gcc default to C89 and will error for this code. +# See if the compiler (gcc or otherwise) needs a flag to compile C99 code +# Initialisations in for loops seem to be the particular problem +# (Does this syntax conflict with something else that was valid C89?) +# Annoyingly -std=c99 will cause gcc to tell glibc not to define prototypes for +# syscall, drand48 etc when including <unistd.h>, which messes up our build. +# I guess we *could* loop round trying -std=c99 first with checks both for the +# prototype found and the code compiling (because -std=gnu99 might do other +# things we don't want, particularly on non-GCC compilers) but +# 1) We would need to check for the prototype first (without any flags) +# 2) We would still end up with most Linux systems either being -std=gnu99 +# or "" (no flag), and so both common options would not rigorously check our +# portability to other platforms. +# So it doesn't seem worth the complexity and chance of different failure. +$cat >try.c <<'EOCP' +int main(int argc, char **argv) { + unsigned long long count = 0; + for (char **p = argv; *p; ++p) { + ++count; + } + return count == 1 ? 0 : 1; +} +EOCP +c99_for=no +for flag in '' '-std=gnu99' '-std=c99'; do + if $cc -o try $flag $ccflags $ldflags try.c 2>/dev/null && ./try; then + c99_for="$flag" + break; + fi +done +case "$c99_for" in +'') echo "Your C compiler doesn't need any special flags to compile C99 for loops with declarations" + ;; +no) echo "Your C compiler doesn't seem to be able to compile C99 for loops with declarations" + rp='Do you really want to continue?' + dflt='n' + . ./myread + case "$ans" in + [yY]) echo >&4 "Okay, continuing." ;; + *) exit 1 ;; + esac + ;; +*) echo "Your C compiler needs $c99_for to compile C99 for loops with declarations" + ccflags="$c99_for $ccflags" + ;; +esac +$rm -f try try.* + + : What should the include directory be ? : Use sysroot if set, so findhdr looks in the right place. echo " " diff --git a/Cross/cflags-cross-arm b/Cross/cflags-cross-arm index 93d4f1eaee..4d7f05a4f6 100644 --- a/Cross/cflags-cross-arm +++ b/Cross/cflags-cross-arm @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ #!/bin/sh # Extra warnings, used e.g. for gcc. -warn="-Wall -ansi -W -Wextra -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -Wc++-compat" +warn="-Wall -W -Wextra -Wendif-labels -Wc++-compat" # Extra standardness. -stdflags=" -std=c89" +stdflags=" -std=c99" # Extra extra. extra="" @@ -113,18 +113,6 @@ for file do case "$cc" in *g++*) - # Extra paranoia in case people have bad canned ccflags: - # bad in the sense that the flags are accepted by g++, - # but then whined about. - for f in -Wdeclaration-after-statement -std=c89 - do - ccflags=`echo $ccflags|sed 's/$f/ /'` - done - ;; -esac - -case "$cc" in -*g++*) # Without -Wno-unused-variable g++ 4.x compiles are rather unwatchable # because of all the warnings about Perl___notused, and g++ doesn't do # __attribute__((unused)) (and even if at some stage it may, people do @@ -146,8 +146,7 @@ stdflags='' # one individually. # TODO: Ponder whether to migrate this back to Configure so hints files can # tweak it. Also, be paranoid about whether results we've deduced in Configure -# (especially about things like long long, which are not in C89) will still be -# valid if we now add flags like -std=c89. +# will still be valid if we now add flags like -std=c99. pedantic='' case "$gccansipedantic" in @@ -159,36 +158,39 @@ case "$gccversion" in [12].*) ;; # gcc versions 1 (gasp!) and 2 are not good for this. Intel*) ;; # # Is that you, Intel C++? # -# NOTE 1: the -std=c89 without -pedantic is a bit pointless. -# Just -std=c89 means "if there is room for interpretation, -# interpret the C89 way." It does NOT mean "strict C89" on its own. +# These comments are adapted from the originals, which were for -std=c89. +# I believe that my updates close to correct, and better than throwing the +# entire comments away, but please check for discrepencies. +# +# NOTE 1: the -std=c99 without -pedantic is a bit pointless. +# Just -std=c99 means "if there is room for interpretation, +# interpret the C99 way." It does NOT mean "strict C99" on its own. # You need to add the -pedantic for that. To do this with Configure, -# do -Dgccansipedantic (note that the -ansi is included in any case, -# the option is a bit oddly named, for historical reasons.) +# do -Dgccansipedantic (note that this is named from the time when we also +# added the -ansi option. That forces -std=c89, so we no longer use it.) +# *Because* we aren't adding -std=c99 if we don't have to, but will add -W, +# some versions of gcc will accept C99 code but warn about not-C89 features. +# (If we added -std=c99 then the warnings enabled by -W would be consistent) +# Hence we add -Wno-long-long and -Wno-declaration-after-statement to cover +# these cases. # # NOTE 2: -pedantic necessitates adding a couple of flags: # * -PERL_GCC_PEDANTIC so that the perl code can adapt: there's nothing # added by gcc itself to indicate pedanticness. # * -Wno-overlength-strings under -DDEBUGGING because quite many of # the LEAVE_with_name() and assert() calls generate string literals -# longer then the ANSI minimum of 509 bytes. +# longer then the ANSI C99 minimum of 4095 bytes. # # NOTE 3: the relative order of these options matters: # -Wextra before -W -# -std=c89 before -ansi -# -pedantic* before -Werror=d-a-s +# -W before -Wno-long-long -Wno-declaration-after-statement # -*) warns="-std=c89 -ansi $pedantic \ +*) warns="-std=c99 $pedantic \ -Werror=pointer-arith \ -Werror=vla \ -Wextra -W \ + -Wno-long-long -Wno-declaration-after-statement \ -Wc++-compat -Wwrite-strings" - # declaration after statement is normal in C++ rather than an - # extension and compilers complain if we try to warn about it - case "$d_cplusplus" in - define) ;; - *) warns="$warns -Werror=declaration-after-statement" ;; - esac for opt in $warns do case " $ccflags " in @@ -215,17 +217,6 @@ Intel*) ;; # # Is that you, Intel C++? echo "cflags.SH: Adding $opt." stdflags="$stdflags $opt" ;; - -ansi) - # -std=c89 is the modern form of -ansi, so add - # -ansi only if -std=c89 is not there already. - case " $stdflags " in - *-std=c89*) ;; - *) - echo "cflags.SH: Adding $opt." - stdflags="$stdflags $opt" - ;; - esac - ;; -W) # -Wextra is the modern form of -W, so add # -W only if -Wextra is not there already. @@ -237,16 +228,6 @@ Intel*) ;; # # Is that you, Intel C++? ;; esac ;; - -Werror=declaration-after-statement) - # -pedantic* (with -std=c89) covers -Werror=d-a-s. - case "$stdflags$warn" in - *-std=c89*-pedantic*|*-pedantic*-std=c89*) ;; - *) - echo "cflags.SH: Adding $opt." - warn="$warn $opt" - ;; - esac - ;; -Werror=pointer-arith) # -pedantic* covers -Werror=p-a case "$warn" in @@ -293,22 +274,14 @@ case "$gccversion" in *) case "$warn$ccflags" in *-pedantic*) - # If we have -Duse64bitint (or equivalent) in effect and the quadtype - # has become 'long long', gcc -pedantic* becomes unbearable - # (moreso when combined with -Wall) because long long and LL and %lld|%Ld - # become warn-worthy. So let's drop the -pedantic in that case. - # - # Similarly, since 'long long' isn't part of C89, FreeBSD 6.2 headers - # don't declare atoll() under -std=c89, but we need it. In general, - # insisting on -std=c89 is inconsistent with insisting on using - # 'long long'. So drop -std=c89 and -ansi as well if we're using - # 'long long' as our main integral type. + # For -std=c99 -pedantic, only the %Ld format seems to be warn-worthy. + # 'long long' and '%lld' are now kosher. # # usedtrace (DTrace) uses unportable features (dollars in identifiers, # and gcc statement expressions), it is just easier to turn off pedantic. remove='' case "$quadtype:$ivtype:$sPRId64:$usedtrace" in - *"long long"*|*lld*|*Ld*) remove='long long' ;; + **Ld*) remove='Ld' ;; *) case "$usedtrace" in define) remove='usedtrace' ;; esac @@ -316,10 +289,9 @@ case "$gccversion" in esac case "$remove" in '') ;; - *) echo "cflags.SH: Removing -pedantic*, -std=c89, and -ansi because of $remove." - ccflags=`echo $ccflags|sed -e 's/-pedantic-errors/ /' -e 's/-pedantic/ /' -e 's/-std=c89/ /' -e 's/-ansi/ /' -e 's/-DPERL_GCC_PEDANTIC/ /'` - warn=`echo $warn|sed -e 's/-pedantic-errors/ /' -e 's/-pedantic/ /' -e 's/-ansi/ /' -e 's/-DPERL_GCC_PEDANTIC/ /'` - stdflags=`echo $stdflags|sed -e 's/-std=c89/ /'` + *) echo "cflags.SH: Removing -pedantic* -ansi because of $remove." + ccflags=`echo $ccflags|sed -e 's/-pedantic-errors/ /' -e 's/-pedantic/ /'` + warn=`echo $warn|sed -e 's/-pedantic-errors/ /' -e 's/-pedantic/ /'` ;; esac ;; @@ -358,13 +330,7 @@ case "$cc" in # Extra paranoia in case people have bad canned ccflags: # bad in the sense that the flags are accepted by g++, # but then whined about. - # - # -Werror=d-a-s option is valid for g++, by definition, - # but we remove it just for cleanliness and shorter command lines. - for f in -Wdeclaration-after-statement \ - -Werror=declaration-after-statement \ - -Wc++-compat \ - -std=c89 + for f in -Wc++-compat -std=c99 do case "$ccflags$warn" in *"$f"*) @@ -377,8 +343,7 @@ case "$cc" in ;; esac -for f in -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Werror=declaration-after-statement \ - -Wpointer-arith -Werror=pointer-arith +for f in -Wpointer-arith -Werror=pointer-arith do case "$cppflags" in *"$f"*) |