Re: Would I be violating the GPL?

[Petr Vandrovec]

Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 10:23:21PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> > Building for VMware Workstation 5.0.0.
>
>
> Well I only looked at 4.5.2
>
>
> > Using 2.6.x kernel build system.
> > make -C /lib/modules/2.6.13-AS20/build/include/.. SUBDIRS=$PWD 
> > SRCROOT=$PWD/. modules
...
> >  CC [M]  /usr/lib/vmware/modules/source/vmmon-only/common/task.o
> > cc1plus: warning: command line option "-Wstrict-prototypes" is valid for 
> > Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++
> > cc1plus: warning: command line option 
> > "-Werror-implicit-function-declaration" is valid for C/ObjC but not for C++
> > cc1plus: warning: command line option "-Wdeclaration-after-statement" is 
> > valid for C/ObjC but not for C++
> > cc1plus: warning: command line option "-Wno-pointer-sign" is valid for 
> > C/ObjC but not for C++
> > cc1plus: warning: command line option "-Wstrict-prototypes" is valid for 
> > Ada/C/ObjC but not for C++
> > cc1plus: warning: command line option "-ffreestanding" is valid for C/ObjC 
> > but not for C++
> > include/asm/bitops.h: In function ???int find_first_bit(const long unsigned 
> > int*,
> > unsigned int)???:
> > include/asm/bitops.h:334: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned 
> > integer expressions
> > [...]
>
>
> Whyever is anything calling cc1plus when the file appear to all be .c?

It is vmmon from my vmware-any-any-updates, not from VMware itself.  I use 
templates from C++ to compile same C code against different structures 
(different ABI), so you can use same vmmon module for all VMware's products.

Using templates instead of including same sources with random #define before 
looked fine at that time when kernel did not use these additional options and/or 
c++ did not complain about them.

Now it seems that I should return back to compiling same sources with different 
#defines as it seems impossible to get rid of these warnings without declaring 
own rules... (and with g++ 4.0 it now even emits incorrect warnings about using 
uninitialized struct members, which is another reason to get rid of c++ compiler 
for me).

So if I would be making decision now and not five years ago, I would not pick 
c++ templates to do the job.
							Petr Vandrovec

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/