User-Agent: Mozilla/4.78 [en] (X11; U; NetBSD 1.6.2 alpha; Nav) Build Identifier: Firefox 1.0 Tens of thousands of compiler warnings (yes really! Tens of thousands!). Fixed over 1900 of them, mostly LP64 related. Still get a seg fault before it even puts up a window. I assume the seg fault is due to an LP64 problem, as I hear it runs on x86. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Turn on the gcc -W options that aren't silly. -Wimplicit -Wmain -Wreturn-type -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -Wredundant-decls -Wformat -Wchar-subscripts -Wconversion -Wunused -Wswitch -Wtrigraphs -Wuninitialized -Wpointer-arith -Wcast-qual -Wcast-align -Wwrite-strings -Wnested-externs -W -Wparentheses -Wcomment -Waggregate-return -Winline -Wshadow 2. Compile on an LP64 system. 3. Be amased that one program could generate sooooo many warnings. 4. Be annoyed at the seg fault (with or without my diffs). Expected Results: A high quality program should generate NO compiler warnings, even with all the "reasonable" -W options turned on, with the possible exception of false positives from -Wuninitilized. A high quality program will never have a segmentation fault. I will attempt to attach diffs with the "Create a new Attachment" gizmo. Most of them are very straightforward, but a few need more than a once over lightly code review, and there are things (notes to myself in comments) that you will not want to check in.
Well, it works fine on Alpha Linux with gcc 3.3 or newer. So this must be something NetBSD specific, or your gcc is too old. Which compiler are you using?
The fact is that the Firefox-1.0 code is not LP64 clean. The code has missing prototypes, incomplete prototypes, assumptions that int and long are the same size, ... This is fundamental stuff that needs to be fixed. NetBSD vs Linux or which version of which compiler has nothing to do with this.
(In reply to comment #3) > The fact is that the Firefox-1.0 code is not LP64 clean. > > The code has missing prototypes, incomplete prototypes, > assumptions that int and long are the same size, ... > > This is fundamental stuff that needs to be fixed. > > NetBSD vs Linux or which version of which compiler > has nothing to do with this. Okay, I thought the main point of this bug was that firefox segfaults on NetBSD, and not compiler warnings. I suggest you open a second bug report for that then. As for the patch, I'm not familiar with mozilla development, but it seems quite unlikely to me that anybody would want to review it. I'd suggest splitting it up both according to the warning that gets fixed and to the part of the source that is affected.
This is an automated message, with ID "auto-resolve01". This bug has had no comments for a long time. Statistically, we have found that bug reports that have not been confirmed by a second user after three months are highly unlikely to be the source of a fix to the code. While your input is very important to us, our resources are limited and so we are asking for your help in focussing our efforts. If you can still reproduce this problem in the latest version of the product (see below for how to obtain a copy) or, for feature requests, if it's not present in the latest version and you still believe we should implement it, please visit the URL of this bug (given at the top of this mail) and add a comment to that effect, giving more reproduction information if you have it. If it is not a problem any longer, you need take no action. If this bug is not changed in any way in the next two weeks, it will be automatically resolved. Thank you for your help in this matter. The latest beta releases can be obtained from: Firefox: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/ Thunderbird: http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/releases/1.5beta1.html Seamonkey: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/
This bug has been automatically resolved after a period of inactivity (see above comment). If anyone thinks this is incorrect, they should feel free to reopen it.
Reopen bug - contains a patch which seems useful.
I'm going to re-close this bug. The patch isn't useful at this point since the Firefox codebase has changed so much. If you have further contributions you want to make, please file a new bug with a bunch of smaller patches and request review from the respective owners of those directories. See also: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/review.html