[U-Boot] getline prototype issue

[Simon Glass]

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 3:38 PM, York Sun <yorksun at freescale.com> wrote:

> On 07/30/2013 02:29 PM, York Sun wrote:
> > On 07/30/2013 02:17 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> >> Hi York,
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 3:12 PM, York Sun <yorksun at freescale.com
> >> <mailto:yorksun at freescale.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     Simon,
> >>
> >>     Your patch
> >>
> >>     commit 669dfc2ed8d853d6bcdcafa1de6aca22929465e5
> >>     Author: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org <mailto:sjg at chromium.org>>
> >>     Date:   Mon Mar 11 06:30:27 2013 +0000
> >>
> >>         fdt: Ensure that libfdt_env.h comes from U-Boot
> >>
> >>     adds libfdt_env.h to HOSTCPPFLAGS. The causes a problem with one of
> our
> >>     older hosts. On the old hosts, getline prototype is protected by
> >>
> >>     #ifdef __USE_GNU
> >>
> >>     This should be OK if the C file has #define _GNU_SOURCE. However,
> >>     because of your patch, the stdio.h is included before _GNU_SOURCE is
> >>     defined. The result is warnings like this
> >>
> >>     aisimage.c: In function ‘aisimage_generate’:
> >>     aisimage.c:313: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘getline’
> >>     kwbimage.c: In function ‘kwdimage_set_ext_header’:
> >>     kwbimage.c:236: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘getline’
> >>     imximage.c: In function ‘parse_cfg_file’:
> >>     imximage.c:430: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘getline’
> >>     pblimage.c: In function ‘pbl_parser’:
> >>     pblimage.c:137: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘getline’
> >>     ublimage.c: In function ‘parse_cfg_file’:
> >>     ublimage.c:179: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘getline’
> >>
> >>
> >> I took a quick look at this. It seems that many of the host C files in
> >> tools/ define _GNU_SOURCE. Should we just move that #define to the
> Makefile?
> >>
> >
> > Adding -D_GNU_SOURCE in Makefile can fix this problem.
> >
>
> Are you going to send out a patch soon?
>

No, but if you do a patch and cc me I will Ack it :-) Sorry but I can't
actually test this case here.

Regards,
Simon