From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Seiderer Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2020 23:32:40 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/3] package/liboping: add patch to fix gcc-8/gcc-9 snprintf truncation compile failure In-Reply-To: <20200307230852.51ac63d9@windsurf.home> References: <20200306201022.22382-1-ps.report@gmx.net> <20200307230852.51ac63d9@windsurf.home> Message-ID: <20200307233240.1cbf0cd4@gmx.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello Thomas, On Sat, 7 Mar 2020 23:08:52 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Hello Peter, > > On Fri, 6 Mar 2020 21:10:20 +0100 > Peter Seiderer wrote: > > > Add patch from upstream merge request ([1]) to fix fix gcc-8/gcc-9 snprintf > > truncation related compile failure (-Wall/-Werror), reported on the > > mailing list ([2]). > > > > Fixes: > > > > liboping.c: In function ?ping_set_ttl?: > > liboping.c:207:9: error: ?%s? directive output may be truncated writing up to 255 bytes into a region of size 242 [-Werror=format-truncation=] > > 207 | "%s: %s", function, message); > > | ^~ > > > > [1] https://github.com/octo/liboping/pull/50 > > [2] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2020-March/275861.html > > > > Reported-by: Maik Brenke > > Signed-off-by: Peter Seiderer > > This build issue has happened once in the autobuilders: > > http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/b12/b12d86388b495a96194e0bcbb5c19a4e35cbc53d/build-end.log > > But liboping has been built successfully zillions of times: > > http://autobuild.buildroot.net/index.php?symbols%5BBR2_PACKAGE_LIBOPING%5D=y > > Why is it that we don't see this build failure ? Don't know...but could reproduce it with the buildroot toolchain for raspberry pi and gcc-9.2.0 and the original reporter used fs-toolchain-8.3-armv7ahf (maybe a gcc-8.3 one)? > > Also, this build failure was reported at > https://github.com/octo/liboping/issues/38, and the upstream developer > says it has been fixed by > https://github.com/octo/liboping/commit/18ca43507b351f339ff23062541ee8d58e813a53, > which is different from your patch. This patch is part of buildroot since commit [3]..., and fixes it at location line 1636ff, the new patch fixes a similar failure, but not the same... at line 203ff... > > Could you clarify this ? > Maybe ;-) Regards, Peter [3] https://git.buildroot.net/buildroot/commit/?id=8361c53eac06a8a96fd029e31ca7119e218e1e3e > Thomas