You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to cvs@httpd.apache.org by yl...@apache.org on 2017/10/16 16:19:46 UTC
svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Author: ylavic
Date: Mon Oct 16 16:19:46 2017
New Revision: 1812303
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1812303&view=rev
Log:
Propose finalized alternative.
Modified:
httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS?rev=1812303&r1=1812302&r2=1812303&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Mon Oct 16 16:19:46 2017
@@ -214,6 +214,19 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
in CTR flow, adding my +1 to note that the patch looks sane.]
rjung: I think we need this also for GCC, not only recent clang.
See the dev list discusion about using NOTEST_CFLAGS.
+ ylavic: Consider (and test ;) proposal below instead?
+
+ *) configure.in: Fix maintainer mode with GCC/Clang.
+ Setting -Wstrict-prototypes in combination with -Werror leads to compiler
+ errors during configure checks (autoconf generates incomplete prototypes).
+ As suggested by Joe, add --maintainer/debugger-mode's CFLAGS in
+ NOTEST_CFLAGS to avoid interractions with autoconf's AC_LANG_PROGRAM.
+ APACHE_ADD_GCC_CFLAG now also forces -Wno-strict-prototypes for -Werror
+ to work despite AC_LANG_PROGRAM generating this warning by itself.
+ trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/r1812263
+ http://svn.apache.org/r1812301
+ 2.4.x patch: svn merge -c 1812263,1812301 ^/httpd/httpd/trunk .
+ +1: ylavic
PATCHES/ISSUES THAT ARE BEING WORKED
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Redirecting this simply to APR...
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 11:49 AM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
> I raised the question of whether the OS/X changes introduced and backported in APR are still necessary or desired, or if they should be backed out, and whether this patch, munged for APR_ macros, is needed for apr 1.6.3 tag?
>
> Yann suggests;
>
> On Oct 16, 2017 11:31, "Yann Ylavic" <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I didn't look at the APR issue still, same one?
> At first glance, APR_ADD_GCC_CFLAG doesn't exist, neither does
> --maintainer-mode try to set -Werror.
> Or am I missing something?
Or am I? Pinging Jim as he constructed the OS/X fix to both APR and httpd.
Perhaps this was out of caution, perhaps this was a specific apr/apr-util
build failure on xcode 9?
Jim, could you elaborate?
> Also, do we want this for APR-1.6 and 1.7? IIRC for instance our use
> of readdir[_r]() might trigger warnings with latest linuxes, or was
> this addressed?
AIUI, we did not change readdir to remove the useless _r() construct, although
it had a bit of activity on the dev@ list. That might not be the only
part that would
break adding -Werror, but fixing it finally would be good.
I don't believe changing the build flags compromises 1.6, except so far as we
don't thoroughly test. We have maintainers of all platforms for svn,
httpd, tomcat
and log4cxx and so on here to double-check the state of apr
1.6.3-dev... but that
takes some cycles and any major flag changes should probably happen after the
1.6.3 tag, with lots of time for review of 1.6.4-dev branch.
I don't have a problem adding -Werror and resolving the apr and
apr-util (inherited)
toggle. I'm of the thought that maintainer mode should not error out,
but emit all
of the bad constructs as warnings, and the more permissive 'typical' build would
omit the extra warnings, but -Werror - since the devs can read error
output. Typical
consumers/deployments don't expect to need to.
> + *) configure.in: Fix maintainer mode with GCC/Clang.
> + Setting -Wstrict-prototypes in combination with -Werror leads to compiler
> + errors during configure checks (autoconf generates incomplete prototypes).
> + As suggested by Joe, add --maintainer/debugger-mode's CFLAGS in
> + NOTEST_CFLAGS to avoid interractions with autoconf's AC_LANG_PROGRAM.
> + APACHE_ADD_GCC_CFLAG now also forces -Wno-strict-prototypes for -Werror
> + to work despite AC_LANG_PROGRAM generating this warning by itself.
> + trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/r1812263
> + http://svn.apache.org/r1812301
> + 2.4.x patch: svn merge -c 1812263,1812301 ^/httpd/httpd/trunk .
> + +1: ylavic
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
Let's keep :)
> On Oct 16, 2017, at 11:54 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
> Seems Jim is +0 to back out and I'm +0 to keep. First
> strong opinion wins so we can get to tagging :)
>
> Absolute consensus on informing our apr, and httpd
> builders what not to pass as CFLAGS, and why.
>
>
> On Oct 16, 2017 13:58, "William A Rowe Jr" <wrowe@rowe-clan.net <ma...@rowe-clan.net>> wrote:
> If the patch has merit on it's own, without being generalized, then I'm fine
> with tagging 1.6.1 with the OS/X specific backport included.
>
> Note that the proposed httpd fix is still uneasy about the trunk flavor;
> https://ci.apache.org/builders/httpd-trunk/builds/1202 <https://ci.apache.org/builders/httpd-trunk/builds/1202>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com <ma...@jagunet.com>> wrote:
> > The APR fix just handles macOS w/ Xcode9 or clang 5.0.0.
> > -Werror can be set "externally" and whether or not we should
> > actually die is debatable. But considering that AC_CHECK_LIB
> > will never use function prototypes, the long term solution may be
> > to simply never use that.
> >
> > I'm +0 on removing the check for APRs but we need to
> > document this behavior someplace since it can easily cause
> > unrepeatable builds.
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
Let's keep :)
> On Oct 16, 2017, at 11:54 PM, William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
> Seems Jim is +0 to back out and I'm +0 to keep. First
> strong opinion wins so we can get to tagging :)
>
> Absolute consensus on informing our apr, and httpd
> builders what not to pass as CFLAGS, and why.
>
>
> On Oct 16, 2017 13:58, "William A Rowe Jr" <wrowe@rowe-clan.net <ma...@rowe-clan.net>> wrote:
> If the patch has merit on it's own, without being generalized, then I'm fine
> with tagging 1.6.1 with the OS/X specific backport included.
>
> Note that the proposed httpd fix is still uneasy about the trunk flavor;
> https://ci.apache.org/builders/httpd-trunk/builds/1202 <https://ci.apache.org/builders/httpd-trunk/builds/1202>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com <ma...@jagunet.com>> wrote:
> > The APR fix just handles macOS w/ Xcode9 or clang 5.0.0.
> > -Werror can be set "externally" and whether or not we should
> > actually die is debatable. But considering that AC_CHECK_LIB
> > will never use function prototypes, the long term solution may be
> > to simply never use that.
> >
> > I'm +0 on removing the check for APRs but we need to
> > document this behavior someplace since it can easily cause
> > unrepeatable builds.
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Seems Jim is +0 to back out and I'm +0 to keep. First
strong opinion wins so we can get to tagging :)
Absolute consensus on informing our apr, and httpd
builders what not to pass as CFLAGS, and why.
On Oct 16, 2017 13:58, "William A Rowe Jr" <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> If the patch has merit on it's own, without being generalized, then I'm
> fine
> with tagging 1.6.1 with the OS/X specific backport included.
>
> Note that the proposed httpd fix is still uneasy about the trunk flavor;
> https://ci.apache.org/builders/httpd-trunk/builds/1202
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> > The APR fix just handles macOS w/ Xcode9 or clang 5.0.0.
> > -Werror can be set "externally" and whether or not we should
> > actually die is debatable. But considering that AC_CHECK_LIB
> > will never use function prototypes, the long term solution may be
> > to simply never use that.
> >
> > I'm +0 on removing the check for APRs but we need to
> > document this behavior someplace since it can easily cause
> > unrepeatable builds.
>
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Seems Jim is +0 to back out and I'm +0 to keep. First
strong opinion wins so we can get to tagging :)
Absolute consensus on informing our apr, and httpd
builders what not to pass as CFLAGS, and why.
On Oct 16, 2017 13:58, "William A Rowe Jr" <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> If the patch has merit on it's own, without being generalized, then I'm
> fine
> with tagging 1.6.1 with the OS/X specific backport included.
>
> Note that the proposed httpd fix is still uneasy about the trunk flavor;
> https://ci.apache.org/builders/httpd-trunk/builds/1202
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> > The APR fix just handles macOS w/ Xcode9 or clang 5.0.0.
> > -Werror can be set "externally" and whether or not we should
> > actually die is debatable. But considering that AC_CHECK_LIB
> > will never use function prototypes, the long term solution may be
> > to simply never use that.
> >
> > I'm +0 on removing the check for APRs but we need to
> > document this behavior someplace since it can easily cause
> > unrepeatable builds.
>
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
If the patch has merit on it's own, without being generalized, then I'm fine
with tagging 1.6.1 with the OS/X specific backport included.
Note that the proposed httpd fix is still uneasy about the trunk flavor;
https://ci.apache.org/builders/httpd-trunk/builds/1202
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> The APR fix just handles macOS w/ Xcode9 or clang 5.0.0.
> -Werror can be set "externally" and whether or not we should
> actually die is debatable. But considering that AC_CHECK_LIB
> will never use function prototypes, the long term solution may be
> to simply never use that.
>
> I'm +0 on removing the check for APRs but we need to
> document this behavior someplace since it can easily cause
> unrepeatable builds.
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
If the patch has merit on it's own, without being generalized, then I'm fine
with tagging 1.6.1 with the OS/X specific backport included.
Note that the proposed httpd fix is still uneasy about the trunk flavor;
https://ci.apache.org/builders/httpd-trunk/builds/1202
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> The APR fix just handles macOS w/ Xcode9 or clang 5.0.0.
> -Werror can be set "externally" and whether or not we should
> actually die is debatable. But considering that AC_CHECK_LIB
> will never use function prototypes, the long term solution may be
> to simply never use that.
>
> I'm +0 on removing the check for APRs but we need to
> document this behavior someplace since it can easily cause
> unrepeatable builds.
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
The APR fix just handles macOS w/ Xcode9 or clang 5.0.0.
-Werror can be set "externally" and whether or not we should
actually die is debatable. But considering that AC_CHECK_LIB
will never use function prototypes, the long term solution may be
to simply never use that.
I'm +0 on removing the check for APRs but we need to
document this behavior someplace since it can easily cause
unrepeatable builds.
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
The APR fix just handles macOS w/ Xcode9 or clang 5.0.0.
-Werror can be set "externally" and whether or not we should
actually die is debatable. But considering that AC_CHECK_LIB
will never use function prototypes, the long term solution may be
to simply never use that.
I'm +0 on removing the check for APRs but we need to
document this behavior someplace since it can easily cause
unrepeatable builds.
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
I raised the question of whether the OS/X changes introduced and backported
in APR are still necessary or desired, or if they should be backed out, and
whether this patch, munged for APR_ macros, is needed for apr 1.6.3 tag?
Yann suggests;
On Oct 16, 2017 11:31, "Yann Ylavic" <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
I didn't look at the APR issue still, same one?
At first glance, APR_ADD_GCC_CFLAG doesn't exist, neither does
--maintainer-mode try to set -Werror.
Or am I missing something?
Also, do we want this for APR-1.6 and 1.7? IIRC for instance our use
of readdir[_r]() might trigger warnings with latest linuxes, or was
this addressed?
On Oct 16, 2017 11:19, <yl...@apache.org> wrote:
Author: ylavic
Date: Mon Oct 16 16:19:46 2017
New Revision: 1812303
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1812303&view=rev
Log:
Propose finalized alternative.
Modified:
httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/
STATUS?rev=1812303&r1=1812302&r2=1812303&view=diff
============================================================
==================
--- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Mon Oct 16 16:19:46 2017
@@ -214,6 +214,19 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
in CTR flow, adding my +1 to note that the patch looks sane.]
rjung: I think we need this also for GCC, not only recent clang.
See the dev list discusion about using NOTEST_CFLAGS.
+ ylavic: Consider (and test ;) proposal below instead?
+
+ *) configure.in: Fix maintainer mode with GCC/Clang.
+ Setting -Wstrict-prototypes in combination with -Werror leads to
compiler
+ errors during configure checks (autoconf generates incomplete
prototypes).
+ As suggested by Joe, add --maintainer/debugger-mode's CFLAGS in
+ NOTEST_CFLAGS to avoid interractions with autoconf's AC_LANG_PROGRAM.
+ APACHE_ADD_GCC_CFLAG now also forces -Wno-strict-prototypes for
-Werror
+ to work despite AC_LANG_PROGRAM generating this warning by itself.
+ trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/r1812263
+ http://svn.apache.org/r1812301
+ 2.4.x patch: svn merge -c 1812263,1812301 ^/httpd/httpd/trunk .
+ +1: ylavic
PATCHES/ISSUES THAT ARE BEING WORKED
Re: svn commit: r1812303 - /httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Posted by William A Rowe Jr <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
I raised the question of whether the OS/X changes introduced and backported
in APR are still necessary or desired, or if they should be backed out, and
whether this patch, munged for APR_ macros, is needed for apr 1.6.3 tag?
Yann suggests;
On Oct 16, 2017 11:31, "Yann Ylavic" <yl...@gmail.com> wrote:
I didn't look at the APR issue still, same one?
At first glance, APR_ADD_GCC_CFLAG doesn't exist, neither does
--maintainer-mode try to set -Werror.
Or am I missing something?
Also, do we want this for APR-1.6 and 1.7? IIRC for instance our use
of readdir[_r]() might trigger warnings with latest linuxes, or was
this addressed?
On Oct 16, 2017 11:19, <yl...@apache.org> wrote:
Author: ylavic
Date: Mon Oct 16 16:19:46 2017
New Revision: 1812303
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1812303&view=rev
Log:
Propose finalized alternative.
Modified:
httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
Modified: httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/
STATUS?rev=1812303&r1=1812302&r2=1812303&view=diff
============================================================
==================
--- httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS (original)
+++ httpd/httpd/branches/2.4.x/STATUS Mon Oct 16 16:19:46 2017
@@ -214,6 +214,19 @@ PATCHES PROPOSED TO BACKPORT FROM TRUNK:
in CTR flow, adding my +1 to note that the patch looks sane.]
rjung: I think we need this also for GCC, not only recent clang.
See the dev list discusion about using NOTEST_CFLAGS.
+ ylavic: Consider (and test ;) proposal below instead?
+
+ *) configure.in: Fix maintainer mode with GCC/Clang.
+ Setting -Wstrict-prototypes in combination with -Werror leads to
compiler
+ errors during configure checks (autoconf generates incomplete
prototypes).
+ As suggested by Joe, add --maintainer/debugger-mode's CFLAGS in
+ NOTEST_CFLAGS to avoid interractions with autoconf's AC_LANG_PROGRAM.
+ APACHE_ADD_GCC_CFLAG now also forces -Wno-strict-prototypes for
-Werror
+ to work despite AC_LANG_PROGRAM generating this warning by itself.
+ trunk patch: http://svn.apache.org/r1812263
+ http://svn.apache.org/r1812301
+ 2.4.x patch: svn merge -c 1812263,1812301 ^/httpd/httpd/trunk .
+ +1: ylavic
PATCHES/ISSUES THAT ARE BEING WORKED