Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:35:14 +0200
From: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: compiler warnings on the buildfarm
In-reply-to: <Pine.BSO.4.64.0707130920510.27066@leary.csoft.net>
To: Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
	Gorm.Andersen@Sun.COM
Message-id: <46977F92.7000000@sun.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <46962BBD.5000108@kaltenbrunner.cc>
	<17428.1184249229@sss.pgh.pa.us> <469653BA.2040004@kaltenbrunner.cc>
	<20917.1184257896@sss.pgh.pa.us> <46969A2E.2020608@kaltenbrunner.cc>
	<16415.1184285944@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<Pine.BSO.4.64.0707122025210.19651@leary.csoft.net>
	<27687.1184290111@sss.pgh.pa.us> <46976F2C.4090303@sun.com>
	<Pine.BSO.4.64.0707130920510.27066@leary.csoft.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070508)

Kris Jurka wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> 
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com> writes:
>>>> So pam_message ** isn't const.
>>>
>>> Ah, thanks.  I see luna_moth is giving the same warning, so it's still
>>> not const in Solaris 11 either.
>>>
>>> Is it worth working around this?  It's strictly cosmetic AFAICS.
>>>
>>> The main issue in my mind would be how to determine whether to use
>>> const or not.  If all Solaris releases are like this, and can be
>>> expected to stay that way,
>>
>> I think yes. It is defined as X/Open standard says.
>>
> 
> Not according to the link you sent earlier.  My reading says that 
> Solaris has it defined wrong and pg has it right.

If I look there 
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/008329799/chap5.htm#tagcjh_06

in "Call Back Information" section. The structure is defined as

     struct pam_conv{ int (*conv) (int, struct pam_message **, struct 
pam_response **, void *); void *appdata_ptr; };


I don't see any "const" keyword there.


	Zdenek