Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:39:12 +0200
From:      Gary Jennejohn <gljennjohn@googlemail.com>
To:        Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>
Cc:        FreeBSD Current <current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: kernel compile broken in latest HEAD
Message-ID:  <20130710073912.54fedfc8@ernst.home>
In-Reply-To: <20130709223356.000005ad@unknown>
References:  <20130709173233.275469b4@ernst.home> <20130709223356.000005ad@unknown>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:33:56 +0200
Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 17:32:33 +0200
> Gary Jennejohn <gljennjohn@googlemail.com> wrote:
> 
> > I just saw this breakage while compiling a kernel on HEAD updated
> > minutes ago:
> 
> Is your cc a gcc or clang? My one is clang and I didn't get build
> errors when I tested the commit. I was told there are those errors with
> gcc. My question in the corresponding thread is so far unanswered.
>

gcc

> Here's what I wrote as a reference:
> ---snip---
> Does someone know what this is supposed to result in?
> 
> I would assume as the unions are unnamed and no variable is declared
> inside the struct with it, that the size of the struct is the same as
> not having those unions inside the structs.
> 
> If this is correct I would assume the correct fix would be to #if-0
> them out.
> ---snip---
> 
> > These line numbers all point at nameless unions.
> > 
> > Seems to me that a union needs a name, otherwise one cannot
> > access its contents.
> > 
> > I simply named them all x to get the kernel to compile, which
> > succeeded.
> 
> Did you name it x ("union x {...};"), or did you declare a variable
> x with it ("union {...} x;")?
> 

the latter

-- 
Gary Jennejohn



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130710073912.54fedfc8>