fix some simple warnings #5
Conversation
gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0 sniffit.c:1801:20: warning: extra tokens at end of #ifdef directive sniffit.c:1805:20: warning: extra tokens at end of #ifdef directive sniffit.c:1809:20: warning: extra tokens at end of #ifdef directive sniffit.c:1813:20: warning: extra tokens at end of #ifdef directive sniffit.c:1817:20: warning: extra tokens at end of #ifdef directive sniffit.c:1821:20: warning: extra tokens at end of #ifdef directive sniffit.c:1825:20: warning: extra tokens at end of #ifdef directive sniffit.c:1829:20: warning: extra tokens at end of #ifdef directive sniffit.c:1833:20: warning: extra tokens at end of #ifdef directive sniffit.c:1837:20: warning: extra tokens at end of #ifdef directive
gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0 sniffit.c:1523:20: warning: passing argument 2 of 'signal' from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types] sniffit.c:1524:20: warning: passing argument 2 of 'signal' from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types] sniffit.c:1525:20: warning: passing argument 2 of 'signal' from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types] Make the function static while at it.
gcc (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0 sn_logfile.c:96:8: warning: passing argument 1 of 'fchmod' makes integer from pointer without a cast [-Wint-conversion] fchmod() takes a file descriptor, not a pointer to FILE, so the call to fchmod() always failed. In order not to involve fileno(), just use chmod(), which takes a pathname, which the function already knows.
|
Hi @infrastation! Thanks a lot for your fixes. Currently, sniffit doesn't build over Debian Sid (unstable) and it is broken for the next Debian Stable. I saw you used Debian Stable with GCC 12. The current problem is with GCC 14. Please, see here[1]. [1] https://bugs.debian.org/1075521 Do you have time to check this issue? You could use a chroot environment to run a Debian Unstable and to make all checks and fixes. If you need, I can provide a tarball with a Debian Unstable up to use with chroot in a directory. Should I merge the current changes? Thanks in advance. |
|
This code is old and it has a number of issues of various severity. As far as I see it, there are two problems:
In my opinion, problem 1 should be solved to preserve sniffit as a working example of a packet analyser from mid-1990s, and problem 2 should not be solved at all. Other people may have a different opinion, but in any case it would help to clean the source tree up. To that end, the source tree generates a lot of compiler warnings, some of which are just noise, some mean trivial problems and some mean more substantial and time-consuming problems. This pull request removes the easy warnings and makes problem 1 smaller, so yes, it is ready for merging in any case. I had a look at the GCC 14 build error that says "error: returning ‘int’ from a function with return type ‘pcap_handler’..." (one of those that are an error in the GCC 14 build) and tried to fix it, but it requires a bit more work. Regarding the setting up of a GCC 14 environment, that's not necessary at this point because the reason the GCC 14 build failed is that some of the pre-existing warnings became errors. The same warnings reproduce using my GCC 12. |
eribertomota
merged commit bf1d8b2
into
resurrecting-open-source-projects:master
I strongly agree. Sniffit was the first source code that I compiled, in 1997. I packaged this program on Debian because of this. Merged.
Thanks for your time. Cheers, Eriberto |
No description provided.