On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 14:48:19 -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Wed, 16 Dec 2020, Todd C. Miller wrote: > > > > Perhaps you are hitting this bug that breaks C99 flag detection? > > https://savannah.gnu.org/support/?110396 > > What are the impacts of that? The impact is that the configure script will incorrectly decide that no compiler flag is needed to support C99 features. It should only be a problem on older compilers that don't support C99 by default. In my case, I noticed it with gcc version 4.2.1 (gccfss). > I just opened this new one. Is it related? > > sr #110403: autoconf-2.70 AC_TYPE_INTMAX_T test failure under OmniOS > > https://savannah.gnu.org/support/index.php?110403 That looks to be a different issue. The version of gcc you are using supports C11 features without requiring any flags. > This test used to work fine on the same system, which has not been > changed throughout the release cycle. I must admit that I did not > test the last release candidate before formal release, but I did test > the other ones. I'm not sure why that test is failing when the unsigned version does not. From the log it certainly appears that intmax_t is discovered correctly. I wonder if this is related: ./config.status: line 556: syntax error at line 562: `<<' unmatched - todd
