On Oct 12, 2011 3:25 AM, "Larry Rosenman" <ler_at_lerctr.org> wrote: > > I didn't say bug for bug, just not generate stupid errors like the ffs one. > -- > Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > Chuck Swiger <cswiger_at_mac.com> wrote: > > On Oct 11, 2011, at 6:59 AM, Larry Rosenman wrote: > > We will NOT support clang as the compiler for lsof unless the system headers work the same way as gcc's do. > > That apparently means you won't support clang then, because it's not intended to be (or ever going to be) fully bug-for-bug "compatible" with GCC. In this case, at least, clang is reporting legitimate issues which should be fixed, even if folks continue to build lsof with GCC from now until the end of days. The elegant solution would be to avoid this problem altogether by re-implementation of lsof using interfaces into the kernel that provide the required information. bsdof anyone?Received on Tue Oct 11 2011 - 15:46:45 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:19 UTC