Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 01:09:24 -0600 From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) To: Paul Eggert <eggert@CS.UCLA.EDU> Cc: freebsd@sopwith.solgatos.com, bug-bison@gnu.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: portability fix for bison-1.75 Message-ID: <20060123070924.GC27389@soaustin.net> In-Reply-To: <87lkx7zcsp.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> References: <200601131825.SAA21164@sopwith.solgatos.com> <87r772obn8.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <20060120211940.GA43031@xor.obsecurity.org> <87u0bymq7x.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu> <20060122044224.GA81690@xor.obsecurity.org> <87lkx7zcsp.fsf@penguin.cs.ucla.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 10:19:34PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote: > Yes, in both cases. I'll follow up separately for each one. > Briefly, Pike is doing a "#define short int", which violates > section 7.1.3 of the C Standard, and bro is doing a > "#define YYLLOC_DEFAULT(Current, Rhs, N) Current = Rhs[N];", > which doesn't properly parenthesize the right-hand side of the macro. > > I'll check whether the bugs are still in the latest versions of these > programs, and if so I'll send a bug report to the upstream developers. > > However.... > > As far as I can tell, neither Pike 7.0 nor bro 0.8 is currently being > maintained by the upstream developer, so what procedure would you > prefer here, to make Bison 2.1 acceptable to you? Should I send you a > patch for these programs personally? Just send-pr and we'll try to catch them as they come in. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060123070924.GC27389>