Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/www/c-icap

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

"Nia Alarie" <nia%netbsd.org@localhost> writes:

> Log Message:
> c-icap: Fails with C23 default language.

> -USE_LANGUAGES=		c
> +FORCE_C_STD=		gnu89

(I didn't comment on the first one, but this now seems like a
larger-scale change.)

It seems the root cause is compilers defaulting to a newer std.  That
seems obviously buggy but not something we can address.

Given how compilers are, a package failing to probe for and set --std is
an upstream bug.

I think any FORCE_C_STD needs a comment.  It's only set because of a
bug.  "fails when compiler defaults to C23" seems like it's it, but that
should travel with the variable definition.  It will not be obvious to
someone in a few years, and maybe not even next week.

It's not obvious why you chose gnu89, or why that's right.  Upstream
should document what it needs, but it probably doesn't.  I would think
that C99 would be a better choice, if it works, as I view that as the
standard C approach these days, vs too-old-you-really-shouldn't of C89,
and the newfangled-is-this-really-necessary C11 and especially C17 and
later.  I realize gnu extensions might be needed, but I think it's
better if they are turned on if they are needed.