Hey! On 8/15/25 1:26 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
On 8/15/25 12:23 PM, Steve Dickson wrote:Hello, On the more recent gcc version (15.1.1) the -Wold-style-definition flag is set by default. This causes warning: old-style function definition [-Wold-style-definition] warnings when functions are defined like int add(a, b) int a; int b; {} instead of like this int add(int a, int b) {} Now I did fix these warnings in the latest rpcbind release... But libtirpc is a different story. I would have to change almost every single function in the library to remove these warnings or add I could add -Wno-old-style-definition to the CFLAGS. Now I'm more that willing to do the work... Heck I'm halfway through... But does it make sense to change the foot print of every function for a warning that may not make any sense?I recommend breaking up the work into several smaller patches, and posting them here for review before you commit.
Not quite sure how to do that... at this point it is one huge commit... growing as we speak. Even if I do it by file... it will still be a ton of patches. But I agree... trying to make it easier to review would be a good thing.
Maybe you could also pass the result through a C linter or clang-tidy. But don't go too crazy. You get the idea.
No worries... I will not go crazy! ;-) But if I do that God only knows what would be found! :-) This is old code... but point taken.
Out of curiosity, what is the test plan once your conversion is code-complete?
The upcoming bakeathon?? In general I lean on the Fedora guys to do the regression testing... But at the end of the day, I didn't realize there would be this much change... so I have not thought that through. Idea welcome! steved.
