Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 00:05:00 -0700 From: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> To: Andrey Chernov <ache@freebsd.org>, Colin Percival <cperciva@FreeBSD.ORG>, src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/named Makefile Message-ID: <44DECF1C.3080606@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20060813055947.GA9508@nagual.pp.ru> References: <200608130532.k7D5WA6g040164@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060813055947.GA9508@nagual.pp.ru>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Andrey Chernov wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 05:32:10AM +0000, Colin Percival wrote:
>> cperciva 2006-08-13 05:32:10 UTC
>>
>> FreeBSD src repository
>>
>> Modified files:
>> usr.sbin/named Makefile
>> Log:
>> Undefine __DATE__ in order to avoid placing a build timestamp into
>> /usr/sbin/{named, lwresd}. Note that POSIX / C99 doesn't technically
>> allow __DATE__ to be (un|re)defined, but gcc does what we mean anyway.
>
> There is a warning. Probably it can interfere with future warn level
> increasing. What about _re_defining date, say, to the date of named
> import?
Redefining __DATE__ produces a similar warning:
<command line>:12:1: warning: "__DATE__" redefined
AFAIK the only way to do this while avoiding warning entirely would be to
edit the source code directly to remove reference to __DATE__, but this
would involve either taking named.c off the vendor branch or convincing
the authors of BIND to adopt the change.
Colin Percival
home |
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44DECF1C.3080606>