Hi, so I was reading coverty scan reports (as Nigel tricked me into looking them), and one of the first is this: https://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/static-analysis/master/glusterfs-coverity/2017-02-07-3c86d946/html/1/8rpc-transport.c.html#error at first, i was wondering why/what is the issue. But, after searching, int8_t is a C99 type, which is signed when compiled on C99 compiler, and likely unsigned when compiled using a non C99 compiler (as I see in ./contrib/argp-standalone/acinclude.m4 , it will be defined to "char" on non c99 platform, which also make no garantee on being signed or unsigned, according to https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4337217/difference-between-signed-unsigned-char ). So, to fix that, should we force to use c99, or update argp-standalone ? (and if we do requires c99 already, how come coverty do not use it ?) -- Michael Scherer Sysadmin, Community Infrastructure and Platform, OSAS
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
