X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Date:	Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:05:16 +0200
From:	Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Cygwin's GCC doesn't like this .sa_handler initialization for some reason
Message-ID:	<20100427090516.GA12365@calimero.vinschen.de>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20100425113232 DOT GA11541 AT sbox> <4BD5C311 DOT 2060708 AT redhat DOT com> <4BD5E165 DOT 6070907 AT gmail DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<4BD5E165.6070907@gmail.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Apr 26 19:54, Dave Korn wrote:
> On 26/04/2010 17:45, Eric Blake wrote:
> > [this was originally raised on the libvirt list]
> > 
> > On 04/25/2010 05:32 AM, Matthias Bolte wrote:
> >> +    struct sigaction action_stop;
> >>  
> >> -    struct sigaction action_stop = {
> >> -        .sa_handler = stop
> >> -    };
> >> +    memset(&action_stop, 0, sizeof action_stop);
> >> +
> >> +    action_stop.sa_handler = stop;
> > 
> > This is because on Linux, sa_handler is a macro that expands into an
> > access of a named member of a named union, whereas on cygwin, sa_handler
> > is a directly named member of an anonymous union.  Is this a gcc bug, or
> > should we be changing cygwin/signal.h to follow Linux' lead of using
> > macros to access named unions to allow source compatibility, since gcc
> > falls flat at performing named initialization of a member of gcc's
> > extension of an anonymous union?
> 
>   This is the long-standing PR10676 :-(
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10676
> 
>   Given the rate of progress so far, I reckon we should adopt Linux'
> workaround.  Hopefully we'll be able to take it back out again someday.

Like this?  We are already using analog definitions in the socket header
files.

Index: include/cygwin/signal.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/winsup/cygwin/include/cygwin/signal.h,v
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -p -r1.18 signal.h
--- include/cygwin/signal.h	26 Feb 2010 05:43:50 -0000	1.18
+++ include/cygwin/signal.h	27 Apr 2010 07:23:05 -0000
@@ -194,14 +194,16 @@ typedef void (*_sig_func_ptr)(int);
 
 struct sigaction
 {
-  __extension__ union
+  union
   {
     _sig_func_ptr sa_handler;  		/* SIG_DFL, SIG_IGN, or pointer to a function */
     void  (*sa_sigaction) ( int, siginfo_t *, void * );
-  };
+  } __sighandler_or_action;
   sigset_t sa_mask;
   int sa_flags;
 };
+#define sa_handler	__sighandler_or_action.sa_handler
+#define sa_sigaction	__sighandler_or_action.sa_sigaction
 
 #define SA_NOCLDSTOP 1   		/* Do not generate SIGCHLD when children
 					   stop */

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -