From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from secure.elehost.com (secure.elehost.com [185.209.179.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02CFD305076 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2025 15:20:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.209.179.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758208830; cv=none; b=Mg6ra5ZrQiObznhYIbAqmm0wkgHPYORGm/UsTJUz2QmQb68pZtNTJD0bbf5WI/bpJs/A9LGSPDjh+xBY6OszoE3sWJxOY02GxfkN8i/aEKzMptW3eeAcHNFThyAFgNwIJs5vZX+/Mgljd4tIsydYLa/gMj7X7oEufE/tyMO+qYA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758208830; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1jmvoQEk8ILvHhoVdV3mdHnwN3sTM39nLO6+0Q4O/6M=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=inYt/XJm7uzx89IQPjHynREY9GGDnmkaN7UnnIYJz5QjnBnKz9ez1WU1oMyD4z3NkeUj0WWTEvZBeQSkmxrS/HgZ9RKebx8BkulKjxa/JVZE6Bs6d+/a7ZchePTEAnR1paiDmfRlzzNtbdry6Fsgj6Sq71R72p9qJY+j882jEkE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=nexbridge.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nexbridge.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.209.179.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=nexbridge.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nexbridge.com X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at secure.elehost.com Received: from Mazikeen (pool-99-228-67-183.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.228.67.183]) (authenticated bits=0) by secure.elehost.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-22ubuntu3) with ESMTPSA id 58IFKKiV1082290 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 18 Sep 2025 15:20:21 GMT Reply-To: From: To: "'Junio C Hamano'" , "'Patrick Steinhardt'" Cc: "'Jeff King'" , References: <01c101dc2842$38903640$a9b0a2c0$@nexbridge.com> <20250918022912.GA1135133@coredump.intra.peff.net> <01c601dc284b$24496400$6cdc2c00$@nexbridge.com> <20250918063152.GA1168297@coredump.intra.peff.net> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [Change] Git build issue on NonStop Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 11:20:15 -0400 Organization: Nexbridge Inc. Message-ID: <020001dc28af$bfec1420$3fc43c60$@nexbridge.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Content-Language: en-ca Thread-Index: AQGqevxo+KmTuwcnT1oackIBbO80YQIfRj6EARK0NvwBapoNmgJuD0nGAL7RSkwB5awH4bSu8CRQ X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250918-4, 9/18/2025), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean On September 18, 2025 10:48 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >Patrick Steinhardt writes: > >> One thing I missed: `uintmax_t` doesn't work on 32 bit systems: >> >> ::error file=clar.c,line=879::clar.c:879:8: cast from pointer to integer of different >size [-Werror=pointer-to-int-cast] >> 879 | (uintmax_t)p1, (uintmax_t)p2); >> | ^ >> >> I'm inclined to just use "%p" instead and accept that this has >> platform-dependent behaviour. Means we'll have to drop the test for >> this, but that's the lesser evil from my point of view. > >As long as %p works everywhere and with stable output, that is the most >appropriate solution, I would think. After all, this is used only for "oops, the test >expects these two pointers are pointing at the same address, but they differ; they >point at these places...". > >To test such a test, wouldn't it be sufficient to perform "does it give a bit of output >or not?" check in isolation? Surprisingly, this actually works on NonStop x86 in both memory models despite warnings to the contrary in their man page.. Thanks :)