Re: error compiling bonobo-activation, glib related?

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

Maciej Stachowiak <mjs noisehavoc org> writes:

> On 23Aug2001 12:01AM (+0200), Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > On Wed, 2001-08-22 at 23:20, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> > > On 22Aug2001 10:22PM (+0200), Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2001-08-22 at 21:25, Darin Adler wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, August 22, 2001, at 12:09  PM, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > yes, and it worked perfectly well, no error messages
> > > > > 
> > > > > OK. Lets try this:
> > > > > 
> > > > >      gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H \
> > > > >        -DBONOBO_ACTIVATION_LOCALEDIR=\"/gnome/head/INSTALL/share/locale\" \
> > > > >        -DORBIT2=1 -I/gnome/head/INSTALL/include/glib-2.0 \
> > > > >        -I/gnome/head/INSTALL/lib/glib-2.0/include 
> > > > > -I/gnome/head/INSTALL/include \
> > > > >        -DVERSION=\"0.9.1\" -ansi -std=c99 -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=199506L \
> > > > >        -D_BSD_SOURCE -Wall -Wchar-subscripts -Wmissing-declarations \
> > > > >        -Wmissing-prototypes -Wnested-externs -Wpointer-arith -Wcast-align \
> > > > >        -Wsign-compare -g -O2 -c \
> > > > >        test.c  -fPIC -DPIC -o test.c.o
> > > > > 
> > > > > Does that work?
> > > > > 
> > > > no, it gives the same error:
> > > > 
> > > > test.c:0: malformed option `-D __STRICT_ANSI__-trigraphs'
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Maybe it's confused by passing both -ansi and -std=c99 (which is
> > > unnecessary anyway). Try taking out -ansi and leaving in only -st=c99.
> > > 
> > ok, removing -ansi gives:
> > 
> > cc1: unknown C standard `c99'
> > 
> > re-adding -ansi and removing -std=c99 seems to work, both for the test
> > program and the Bonobo_Unknown-common.c file. But I still get the glib
> > problem (__VA_ARGS__).
> > 
> 
> The -std=c99 was specifically to avoid that glib problem. what version
> of gcc do you have? Does -std=c9x work?

We use the attached patch for the stable branch of GTK+ for the Red
Hat SRPM. If people wants to try this adding magic to gmessages.h and
give it some testing on various compilers, that could be useful.

I think adding -std=c99 is probably better avoided, since it somewhat
negates the effect of -ansi -pedentic in terms of other non-portable
constructs.

Thanks,
                                                  Owen


--- glib-1.2.10/glib.h.isowarning	Mon Feb 26 22:44:38 2001
+++ glib-1.2.10/glib.h	Sat Jul 21 19:36:31 2001
@@ -1291,6 +1291,13 @@
 #ifndef	G_LOG_DOMAIN
 #define	G_LOG_DOMAIN	((gchar*) 0)
 #endif	/* G_LOG_DOMAIN */
+
+/* Suppress warnings when GCC is in -pedantic mode and not -std=c99
+ */
+#if (__GNUC__ >= 3 || (__GNUC__ == 2 && __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 96))
+#pragma GCC system_header
+#endif
+
 #if defined (__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ >= 199901L
 #define	g_error(...)	g_log (G_LOG_DOMAIN,         \
 			       G_LOG_LEVEL_ERROR,    \