[PATCH v3] libsframe: testsuite: Fix testsuite build on Solaris

[Rainer Orth]

Hi Indu,

>>> Thanks for doing this.  This being your work/fix, I've reassigned the PR
>>> 33168 to you.  It will be good to add a "PR libsframe/33168" to the commit
>>> log for marking the fix.
>> That's one thing I wondered about: libsframe currently doesn't have no
>> ChangeLog file.  Unlike over in gcc, that's not generated from the
>> commit messages.  So far I missed that the libsfram commit message *do*
>> include ChangeLog snippets.  I'll add one to the commit, together with
>> the PR reference.
>> 
>
> Thanks.
>
> BTW, Yes, I tend to include ChangeLog snippets in my own commits, as I find
> them helpful.  This is _not_ mandatory wrt Binutils commit log guidelines.

You're right: I missed that part of

https://sourceware.org/binutils/wiki/HowToContribute

Changed files should be named in the accompanying email, and if
ChangeLog files are being updated, then there too.

Since there's no libsframe/ChangeLog, need to update it.  I agree,
though, that they are helpful: that's another chance to review your own
changes.

> But that said, adding a ChangeLog snippet in commit log is orthogonal to
> adding a "PR libsframe/33168" to commit log.  The post commit hooks will
> DTRT with just that string in the commit log.

I've done that now, together with a complete ChangeLog entry.

>> >>> diff --git a/libsframe/testsuite/sframe-test.h 
> b/libsframe/testsuite/sframe-test.h
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/libsframe/testsuite/sframe-test.h
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
>>>> +/* sframe-test.h -- Common libsframe testsuite header.
>>>> +
>>>> +   Copyright (C) 2022-2025 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Typo: 2022-2025 --> 2025
>> Really?  The bulk of the file is just copied from existing code.
>> Shouldn't it retain that code's date range?
>> 
>
> I usually follow the rule of keeping the current year for a new file, since
> the file did not exist prior to date.  May be someone else can confirm
> whats more appropriate here.

Since there wasn't a response to this so far, I've kept the range from
the source files as is.  If that's deemed inappropriate, it can easily
be fixed later.

>>> If adding a prototype "void wait (void);" is not preferable, we can add
>>> -Wno-missing-prototypes for the testsuite ?
>> I prefer the prototype route over the warning myself if it works.
>> Should I just commit the final patch with those updates or post a v4?
>
> Please go ahead and commit.  Thanks.

I've done that now.  Thanks for your patience.

	Rainer

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University