This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 11/26/2011 00:39, nick clifton wrote: >> I got no comment on that part of the email back then, and I still >> don't know if this should be considered as an error in mingw32 >> declarations or if it should be fixed in Binutils sources. >> >> I would like to know if this warning should be corrected or not... > > I guess that mingw32 is free to define system headers as it so chooses. > If however it is attempting to be POSIX compatible then it should > follow the POSIX standard for the execvp() function and prototype it as: > > int execvp(const char *path, char *const argv[]); > > Ie, the binutils are correct and mingw32 ought to be changed. I suspect > however that the mingw32 project will not want to change their header, > so the best compromise would be to fix the binutils. > Before the misinformation spreads, see MSDN docs at: <http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/3xw6zy53%28v=vs.80%29.aspx>. intptr_t _execvp( const char *cmdname, const char *const *argv ); execvp is an alias to _execvp. POSIX or not, MinGW can't change that without annoying their target audience.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |