svn commit: samba r6586 - in branches/SAMBA_3_0/source: lib libads libsmb smbd tests torture

Herb Lewis hlewis at
Mon May 2 19:06:55 GMT 2005

For the real functions the definitions are generated in proto.h
but you will notice this file does not include any headers. The
exact error I am getting rid of is when you have strict prototypes
declared in your flags.

derrell at wrote:
> derrell at writes:
>>herb at writes:
>>>get rid of a few more compiler warnings
>>>Modified: branches/SAMBA_3_0/source/lib/dummyroot.c
>>>--- branches/SAMBA_3_0/source/lib/dummyroot.c	2005-05-02 16:23:02 UTC (rev 6585)
>>>+++ branches/SAMBA_3_0/source/lib/dummyroot.c	2005-05-02 17:49:43 UTC (rev 6586)
>>>@@ -22,6 +22,9 @@
>>> /* Stupid dummy functions required due to the horrible dependency mess
>>>    in Samba. */
>>>+void become_root(void);
>>>+void unbecome_root(void);
>>> void become_root(void)
>>> {
>>>         return;
>>Herb, I don't get it.  What is the purpose of a forward declaration
>>immediately prior to an actual function declaration?  What type of warning
>>were you getting that this solves?
> Herb, in talking with abartlet, I now understand what problem this was trying
> to solve.  These are public functions, and therefore should have calls by
> external (not in the same file) users.  (If not, they'd likely be declared
> static.)  These stub functions that you have corrected should, as you
> discovered, have external declarations as well.  Since the callers are
> intended to be external, the external declarations should really be in a
> header file so that all callers to these functions are using the same external
> declaration.  By putting the external declarations in the C file with the
> function declaration, the warning is removed, but the "purpose" of the warning
> is defeated.
> In our discussion, abartlet and I agreed that the proper place for these
> declarations is probably in proto.h, which raises the question as to why they
> are not automagically being added to proto.h.  Would you like to try to figure
> out why they're not being generated in proto.h, and perhaps fix it so they
> are?
> If there is some reason that they shouldn't in fact, go in proto.h, then it
> seems that includes.h would likely be the right place for them.
> Cheers,
> Derrell

More information about the samba-technical mailing list