From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 941C820401 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 18:55:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753341AbdF0SzS (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2017 14:55:18 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f46.google.com ([74.125.82.46]:35653 "EHLO mail-wm0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752311AbdF0SzQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jun 2017 14:55:16 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f46.google.com with SMTP id w126so32960527wme.0 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:55:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:user-agent:in-reply-to:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=m48/WbzcpcpBI9wfrwHFxQX1+bjPxbK2R6dEs+JOgXQ=; b=eBNJTUteTUZj+rLq50p2X39AfvPXPEYkmbUDIILx+D45D2dn8FQFrNx/lgL6TgGYFQ fX3Svy+QivWlz7PD4tknYWnOq0Lhk1XKPvADPCiNHHrgIz+Bp1Kn2p+0w3m8krAoVgQG ii/k8Srt7gYSiiJXBeG1oXMoojSmonqqO8T798PBa+2cv7fP5ZSBtYQ6sdUMAmo02QzY CV2/ALrE3IgGc8+z/dv1abFqGunFbceQtMRDyqkoOON1sjzmKPIhJksbtn+VgJuJPzZ3 s4wDODNIRnyjmA7UkRlhcGwfs508/25WuxqQ600zwZ2kliq4mqo3Pn3TKgyh5RPVy/4h 43SA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=m48/WbzcpcpBI9wfrwHFxQX1+bjPxbK2R6dEs+JOgXQ=; b=lEfr3R0vQfI1lNdFAtHnTvU1xrQ7PCI5D+An5B+GczMOHYrqnVoUpsibGYSVWI8vpB 31WnkAEiJtyhx4nuBtCnnDiOzwd4DMxFwzzTCjJhadJPCxZ2CJ4p8DTEDjP9AP1d8muX f96u8aGE9aCa+tH2S6wyJcjylf4MV1hjSrR3U3hcIroPFqffJg2u0SYVR9veiQOhQ/5v VwFOBbT2MA18K28cxkjaUtglEsoekS+wROwxWsYYrC4Xg63KrqjGk4sMorqWl38NlTWo 0GNuo8X/3PrUuhpXkakYk2YRj40uaYTMDaz1rHtTfYsAAGDE6kpexGB8JDkFsbp9KiiS IcvA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOzZglAaSaaf4z4YZOaRm1yqbG71Pg4xevYFm1uCJwisg6Q7L7y+ QtY/2R1MUWlvrg== X-Received: by 10.80.139.151 with SMTP id m23mr4844947edm.140.1498589715350; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:55:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snth (g74110.upc-g.chello.nl. [80.57.74.110]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d36sm1442990edb.63.2017.06.27.11.55.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:55:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from avar by snth with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dPvdp-0006bb-FL; Tue, 27 Jun 2017 20:55:13 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: "Liam R. Howlett" Cc: Junio C Hamano , Michael Kebe , Git Mailing List , Marc Stevens Subject: Re: Compile Error v2.13.2 on Solaris SPARC References: <87fuem7aw2.fsf@gmail.com> <20170627162808.p7sj3jpwum7n3hq2@oracle.com> <20170627182942.gpug4xaek2vba7uh@oracle.com> User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux 8.8 (jessie); Emacs 25.1.1; mu4e 0.9.19 In-reply-to: <20170627182942.gpug4xaek2vba7uh@oracle.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 20:55:13 +0200 Message-ID: <87shiljm5q.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 27 2017, Liam R. Howlett jotted: > This compressed logic is causing a lot of issues. Could we just rewrite > it as a whole lot of #if/#else, statements to avoid running across the > issue where the precompiler does not short-circuit the checks? Would > this cause any other issues? Again, this is hopefully addressed by my 20170627121718.12078-2-avarab@gmail.com ([PATCH 1/3] sha1dc: update from my PR #36). > A third option is to compile a small test and just -DSHA1DC_BIGENDIAN in > the Makefile. This would be ideal, but so far the only facility we have for that is the configure script, which there have been objections to making a hard dep in the past, thus we have various bits done via macros that would be better done via built-time compiling & testing a C program. My memory of such discussions is hazy though, did people fundimentally object to the idea, or was it just an objection to autoconf in particular, I don't know. If it was just autoconf maybe someone more clever at Makefile magic than me could come up with a way to compile a test program that would then define a flag that would be passed to the rest of the programs, and set up dependencies in such a way that it was done before anything else, I don't know if that's easy/possible with make.