[PATCH] #ifdef code cleanup

[Andreas Schneider]

On Friday, 23 November 2018 22:42:05 CET Andrew Bartlett via samba-technical 
wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-11-23 at 15:33 +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> > On Friday, 23 November 2018 09:25:23 CET Andrew Bartlett via
> > samba-technical> 
> > wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2018-11-23 at 10:06 +1300, Andrew Bartlett via samba-technical
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2018-11-22 at 21:32 +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, 22 November 2018 19:36:57 CET Andrew Bartlett via
> > > > > samba-technical> >
> > > > > 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > This looks good, but honestly I'm a bit nervous.  Any chance you
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > done a build somehow forcing -E into the gcc line and compared the
> > > > > > results before/after?
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is mostly from CFLAGS="-Wundef"
> > > > 
> > > > Sure, it's not the detection method I'm worried about, it is that
> > > > large
> > > > patch sets like this can easily slip in typo or similar and cause the
> > > > condition to no longer match.
> > > > 
> > > > A way to guard against that is to demonstrate that the build produces
> > > > the same output with and without the patch.
> > > > 
> > > > When I make big changes to our selftest system I ensure that the same
> > > > tests (or if different, I can account for the difference) still get
> > > > printed in the output stream, to ensure we don't silently miss tests.
> > > > 
> > > > Likewise I'm pretty sure I did checking of the config.h results during
> > > > the waf upgrade.
> > > > 
> > > > Perhaps build with eg CC="my-cc.sh" that compiles with gcc -E and then
> > > > again with a full gcc, to get at the CPP output?
> > > 
> > > I tried and failed to build that way with the attached.  No idea why it
> > > doesn't work.  So this isn't a reasonable request.  If someone else can
> > > eyeball the whole series and check it is correct, I'll be happy.
> > 
> > Here is a list produced with the attach script. I've added comments where
> > they are checked, but the check fails so do not show up at all in
> > config.h or we have #ifdef in the code and no configure check for it,
> > which means it is dead code.
> 
> I did a test on my host with the script I suggested last night, fixed
> up to finally work.
> 
> I had to revert:
> 
> s3: Remove unsused MMAP_BLACKLIST ifdef checks
> lib:replace: Check if HAVE_DECL_ENVIRON is defined first
> 
> (these can be reasoned about independently).
> 
> To make it give the (almost) identical results you see below.
> 
> Thanks for you work on this.
> 
> (No, this isn't a review, but it is an answer to the question I posed
> above).


Review still needed ...


Anyone?


-- 
Andreas Schneider                      asn at samba.org
Samba Team                             www.samba.org
GPG-ID:     8DFF53E18F2ABC8D8F3C92237EE0FC4DCC014E3D