Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 3 Feb 2006 23:53:34 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Max Laier <max@love2party.net>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [head tinderbox] failure on amd64/amd64
Message-ID:  <20060203235235.T1100@fledge.watson.org>
In-Reply-To: <200602040028.47826.max@love2party.net>
References:  <20060203230755.B8CA57302F@freebsd-current.sentex.ca> <200602040028.47826.max@love2party.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Sat, 4 Feb 2006, Max Laier wrote:

> On Saturday 04 February 2006 00:07, FreeBSD Tinderbox wrote:
>> -finstrument-functions -Wno-inline /src/sys/security/audit/audit_arg.c
>> /src/sys/security/audit/audit_arg.c: In function `audit_arg_upath':
>> /src/sys/security/audit/audit_arg.c:676: warning: long long unsigned int
>> format, u_int64_t arg (arg 2) /src/sys/security/audit/audit_arg.c:678:
>> warning: long long unsigned int format, u_int64_t arg (arg 2) *** Error
>> code 1
>
> Once again, fixed by - for example - the attached patch.  Alternatively:
> 	.. "%ju", (uintmax_t)arg ..	// we are so C99
>
> I take this a chance to rant if we could remove this stupid 64bit 
> unportability.  It should be possible to have a CASSERT somewhere that shuts 
> this up if "sizeof(u_int64_t) == sizeof(unsigned long long)" or the like. 
> I hope somebody has more insight and how/where to fix it properly. 
> Otherwise we will run into this portability issue over and over again.

Thanks.  I just realized I did my amd64 test builds without INVARIANTS 
compiled in.  Patch committed.  No opinion on the format string thing, except 
that I keep shooting the feet of myself and others.

Robert N M Watson



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060203235235.T1100>