Fix --strict-warnings build on djgpp (3.1)
#19843
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
For some reason djgpp uses '(unsigned) long int' for (u)int32_t. This causes errors with -Werror=format, even though these types are in practice identical. Obvious solution: cast to the types indicated by the format string.
This causes a warning otherwise when socklen_t is signed (Watt32).
This matches the declaration in <openssl/crypto.h>.
I chose to just hide this behind '#ifndef __DJGPP__', instead of listing all the macro combinations where it *is* used. That would make quite a mess.
github-actions
bot
added
the
severity: fips change
t8m
added
approval: review pending
t8m
approved these changes
Dec 6, 2022
t8m
removed
the
approval: otc review pending
paulidale
approved these changes
Dec 6, 2022
paulidale
added
approval: done
openssl-machine
added
approval: ready to merge
|
This pull request is ready to merge |
|
Merged to 3.1, thanks for the submission. |
openssl-machine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 8, 2022
For some reason djgpp uses '(unsigned) long int' for (u)int32_t. This causes errors with -Werror=format, even though these types are in practice identical. Obvious solution: cast to the types indicated by the format string. Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org> (Merged from #19843)
openssl-machine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 8, 2022
This causes a warning otherwise when socklen_t is signed (Watt32). Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org> (Merged from #19843)
openssl-machine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 8, 2022
This matches the declaration in <openssl/crypto.h>. Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org> (Merged from #19843)
openssl-machine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 8, 2022
Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org> (Merged from #19843)
openssl-machine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 8, 2022
I chose to just hide this behind '#ifndef __DJGPP__', instead of listing all the macro combinations where it *is* used. That would make quite a mess. Reviewed-by: Tomas Mraz <tomas@openssl.org> Reviewed-by: Paul Dale <pauli@openssl.org> (Merged from #19843)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Similar to #19322, but for the 3.1 branch.