Bug 53655 – gnome-pilot-2.0.10-r1 fails to compile with gcc-3.4

• Status: RESOLVED FIXED
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Jeremy Huddleston (RETIRED) 2004-06-11 09:10:05 UTC]

gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I.. -DORBIT2=1 -pthread -DXTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -DXUSE_MTSAFE_API -I/usr/include/libgnome-2.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/orbit-2.0 -I/usr/include/libbonobo-2.0 -I/usr/include/gconf/2 -I/usr/include/gnome-vfs-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gnome-vfs-2.0/include -I/usr/include/bonobo-activation-2.0 -I/usr/include/libgnomeui-2.0 -I/usr/include/libgnomecanvas-2.0 -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/include/libart-2.0 -I/usr/include/libbonoboui-2.0 -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/freetype2/config -I/usr/include/libxml2 -I/usr/include/libglade-2.0   -I/usr/include/libpisock -DGNOMELOCALEDIR=\""/usr/share/locale"\" -DGLADEDATADIR=\""/usr/share/gnome-pilot/glade"\"     -O2 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer   -c gnome-pilot-capplet.c
gnome-pilot-capplet.c: In function `init':
gnome-pilot-capplet.c:186: error: label at end of compound statement
make[2]: *** [gnome-pilot-capplet.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/raid0/tmp/portage/gnome-pilot-2.0.10-r1/work/gnome-pilot-2.0.10/capplet'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/raid0/tmp/portage/gnome-pilot-2.0.10-r1/work/gnome-pilot-2.0.10'
make: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2

!!! ERROR: app-pda/gnome-pilot-2.0.10-r1 failed.
!!! Function gnome2_src_compile, Line 39, Exitcode 2
!!! compile failure

[Comment 1 Jeremy Huddleston (RETIRED) 2004-06-11 09:22:11 UTC]

Created attachment 33088 [details, diff]
gnome-pilot-3.4.patch

[Comment 2 Jeremy Huddleston (RETIRED) 2004-06-11 09:23:26 UTC]

whoops... gnome is the primary herd...

[Comment 3 Martin Diers 2004-07-09 18:04:23 UTC]

That will work, however, just to be picky:

<soapbox>
Good coding practice demands a single point of exit for any given function.

Therefore, a better patch would add a "return;" after the "error:" label, rather than replacing every "goto error;" with a "return;".
</soapbox>

;-)

[Comment 4 foser (RETIRED) 2004-07-12 06:12:17 UTC]

martins comment makes sense eradicator

but i'm fine with the patch one way or the other, just put it in.

[Comment 5 Jeremy Huddleston (RETIRED) 2004-07-12 11:58:08 UTC]

ok... I'm rechecking this now and

[Comment 6 Jeremy Huddleston (RETIRED) 2004-07-12 11:59:18 UTC]

in portage...