This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

New warnings: INT redefined

From: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
To: GNU libc hacker <libc-hacker at sourceware dot cygnus dot com>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 14:04:28 +0100
Subject: New warnings: INT redefined


Using INT in libc-symbols was not the best idea, we now get a lot of
warnings since INT was used previously:

../sysdeps/generic/strtol.c:62:1: warning: "INT" redefined
../include/libc-symbols.h:355:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition
../sysdeps/generic/strtol.c:64:1: warning: "INT" redefined
../include/libc-symbols.h:355:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition
tst-printf.c:77:1: warning: "INT" redefined
../include/libc-symbols.h:358:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition

How should we solve this issue?  I would suggest to use INTNAME
instead of INT in libc-symbols.h.

What do you think?  Shall I send a patch?

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj

Follow-Ups:
- Re: New warnings: INT redefined
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]