From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54088) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dqKL6-000380-9U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 10:33:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dqKL3-0000F3-5U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 10:33:00 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:58478) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dqKL2-0000Ef-VB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Sep 2017 10:32:57 -0400 Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 15:32:50 +0100 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Message-ID: <20170908143250.GI32645@redhat.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" References: <20170908135831.10556-1-berrange@redhat.com> <150488090978.210.8841793665432135928@6d89bd104fc3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <150488090978.210.8841793665432135928@6d89bd104fc3> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/3] Improve websock response / error handling List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: famz@redhat.com, brak@vultr.com, f4bug@amsat.org On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 07:28:30AM -0700, no-reply@patchew.org wrote: > /tmp/qemu-test/src/io/channel-websock.c: In function 'qio_channel_websock_date_str': > /tmp/qemu-test/src/io/channel-websock.c:178:14: error: passing argument 1 of 'gmtime_r' from incompatible pointer type [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types] > gmtime_r(&tv.tv_sec, &tm); > ^ > In file included from /tmp/qemu-test/src/include/qemu/osdep.h:76:0, > from /tmp/qemu-test/src/io/channel-websock.c:21: > /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/time.h:272:34: note: expected 'const time_t * {aka const long long int *}' but argument is of type 'long int *' > __forceinline struct tm *__cdecl gmtime_r(const time_t *_Time, struct tm *_Tm) { > ^~~~~~~~ > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors Ok that's interesting - Linux documents 'struct timeval' as containing time_t type, but Mingw uses a plain 'long'. So much for standards :-( Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|