From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: Breakage (?) in configure and git_vsnprintf() Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:45:39 +0100 Message-ID: <4EE5B123.2030708@viscovery.net> References: <4EE4F97B.9000202@alum.mit.edu> <20111212064305.GA16511@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Michael Haggerty , Junio C Hamano , git discussion list , Michal Rokos , Brandon Casey To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Dec 12 08:45:50 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ra0a6-0005mT-D7 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:45:50 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751519Ab1LLHpq (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Dec 2011 02:45:46 -0500 Received: from lilzmailso02.liwest.at ([212.33.55.13]:64147 "EHLO lilzmailso02.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751036Ab1LLHpq (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Dec 2011 02:45:46 -0500 Received: from cpe228-254-static.liwest.at ([81.10.228.254] helo=theia.linz.viscovery) by lilzmailso02.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ra0Zv-0003RO-No; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:45:39 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.95] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.95]) by theia.linz.viscovery (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F6361660F; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:45:39 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 In-Reply-To: <20111212064305.GA16511@sigill.intra.peff.net> X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 12/12/2011 7:43, schrieb Jeff King: > I'll leave the issue of "-std=c89" triggering SNPRINTF_RETURNS_BOGUS to > people who know and care about autoconf. My gut is to say "don't do > that". Right. But Michael's problem was actually that SNPRINTF_RETURNS_BOGUS was set incorrectly; his system has a working snprintf (or so I assume). The reason for the failure is that ./configure's test program produced a warning, and that warning was turned into an error due to -Werror. Without -Werror, the test program would have compiled successfully, and the working snprintf would have been detected. -- Hannes