Re: Compilation warnings in jbsockets.c

Ian Silvester <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> On 2013-03-05, at 6:16 AM, Fabian Keil wrote:
> 
> > Ian Silvester <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> >> Ever since I started handling the OS X builds I've had the following warnings when building (regardless of architecture being targeted):
> >> 
> >> gcc -c -pipe  -I/usr/local/include/ -isysroot /Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.4u.sdk -arch ppc -mmacosx-version-min=10.4   -Dunix -Wall   jbsockets.c -o jbsockets.o
> >> jbsockets.c: In function ‘get_host_information’:
> >> jbsockets.c:1063: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 3 of ‘getsockname’ differ in signedness
> >> jbsockets.c: In function ‘accept_connection’:
> >> jbsockets.c:1291: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 3 of ‘accept’ differ in signedness
> >> 
> >> I've kept meaning to post them in case its important that the code
> >> is modified to avoid them, though it doesn't appear to be important to me.
> > 
> > In both cases the type of the third arguments depends on whether
> > or not __APPLE_CC__ is defined because apparently that was useful
> > in 2002.
> > 
> > If your gcc defines it,
> 
> It does.
> 
> > you could try removing the two checks
> > to get a proper socklen_t. If it doesn't, you could add a define
> > to "downgrade" the type to int.
> 
> So I removed "|| __APPLE_CC__" from the two ifdefs and indeed the warnings are no longer displayed.

Great, please commit.

> > I agree that these warnings look harmless, but if they can be
> > trivially fixed we should probably do it.
> 
> Are you happy that I commit the file with the removals or should
> I test the installed build first. If I test, what should I be testing for?

In theory all commits should be tested. If the commit doesn't
affect the installation process, testing the binary without a 
complete re-installation should be sufficient.

In this case you could verify that http://p.p/ still shows the
same "This is Privoxy ..." message and that the regression tests
still pass.

Fuzzing around with gdb to reach the various error conditions
and edge cases never hurts, but for a trivial commit like this
I wouldn't do it myself.

Removing the defines should only affect OS X and as you enable
the code paths that have been used and tested on other platforms
for years the risk seems pretty low to me.

Fabian

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to 
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev

_______________________________________________
Ijbswa-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ijbswa-developers

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)
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=JduZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----