From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Remove check for accept() argument types
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2021 14:16:25 +0100
Message-ID: <3863895c-d40b-4154-de8f-4961386b2515@enterprisedb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1440792.1636558888@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <E1mkSdp-0008FH-7Y@gemulon.postgresql.org>
<1440792.1636558888@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On 10.11.21 16:41, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes:
>> Remove check for accept() argument types
>
> Early returns from the buildfarm are
>
> gaur | 2021-11-09 16:55:58 | auth.c:3235:17: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 6 of 'recvfrom' differ in signedness
> gaur | 2021-11-09 16:55:58 | pqcomm.c:722:9: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 3 of 'accept' differ in signedness
> gaur | 2021-11-09 16:55:58 | pqcomm.c:743:6: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 3 of 'getsockname' differ in signedness
> gaur | 2021-11-09 16:55:58 | pgstat.c:483:39: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 3 of 'getsockname' differ in signedness
> gaur | 2021-11-09 16:55:58 | pgstat.c:630:9: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 5 of 'getsockopt' differ in signedness
> gaur | 2021-11-09 16:55:58 | fe-connect.c:2760:11: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 5 of 'getsockopt' differ in signedness
> gaur | 2021-11-09 16:55:58 | fe-connect.c:2788:9: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 3 of 'getsockname' differ in signedness
>
> Right offhand I don't see any other animals complaining.
> May I suggest that "unsigned int" would be a better choice
> than "int" for socklen_t?
I have been waiting for a few more buildfarm members to finish (mainly
the other AIX and HPUX instances), but they appear to be on strike right
now. But based on existing results and extrapolation, it might be that
gaur is actually the only one without socklen_t, so we can do whatever
we want to make it happy. What does the man page say the correct type
would be? size_t?
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org
Cc: peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Remove check for accept() argument types
In-Reply-To: <3863895c-d40b-4154-de8f-4961386b2515@enterprisedb.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox