Re: Merging feature/android

[Po Lu]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org>
>> Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com,  corwin@bru.st,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 12:59:06 +0100
>> 
>> Thanks.  Another observation: When I run make on master, I see these
>> warnings:
>> 
>>   CC       atimer.o
>>   CC       doprnt.o
>> In file included from process.c:33:
>> In function 'SDATA',
>>     inlined from 'SSDATA' at lisp.h:1677:19,
>>     inlined from 'create_process' at process.c:2254:40,
>>     inlined from 'Fmake_process' at process.c:2059:7:
>> lisp.h:1671:31: warning: array subscript 0 is outside array bounds of 
>> 'char[]' [-Warray-bounds]
>>  1671 |   return XSTRING (string)->u.s.data;
>>       |          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~
>> lisp.h:1671:31: warning: null pointer dereference [-Wnull-dereference]
>>   CC       intervals.o
>> 
>> and
>> 
>>   CC       w32inevt.o
>>   CC       w32proc.o
>> w32heap.c: In function 'getrlimit':
>> w32heap.c:853:14: warning: 'm' may be used uninitialized 
>> [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
>>   853 |         if (!VirtualQuery ((LPCVOID) &m, &m, sizeof m))
>>       |              ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> In file included from C:/msys64/mingw64/include/winbase.h:25,
>>                  from C:/msys64/mingw64/include/windows.h:70,
>>                  from w32common.h:24,
>>                  from w32heap.c:54:
>> C:/msys64/mingw64/include/memoryapi.h:45:28: note: by argument 1 of type 
>> 'LPCVOID' {aka 'const void *'} to 'VirtualQuery' declared here
>>    45 |   WINBASEAPI SIZE_T WINAPI VirtualQuery (LPCVOID lpAddress, 
>> PMEMORY_BASIC_INFORMATION lpBuffer, SIZE_T dwLength);
>>       |                            ^~~~~~~~~~~~
>> w32heap.c:844:34: note: 'm' declared here
>>   844 |         MEMORY_BASIC_INFORMATION m;
>>       |                                  ^
>>   CC       w32image.o
>
> Those are bogus warnings (a.k.a. bugs/misfeatures of the GCC version
> you are using).  Disregard them.
>
>> Running make on the feature branch, I don't get them.  Does it mean that
>> Po Lu has kindly fixed them?
>
> I doubt that.

I did not.  Perhaps something in gnulib has caused this change?