980848 - NSS 3.15.5 & 3.16 uses c++-styles comments in c files

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(NSS :: Tools, defect)

Description

[Landry Breuil (:gaston)]

when built with gcc 4.8 or 4.6, m-c and m-a fail to build since nss was updated to 3.16b3 in bug 967153, introducing this:

        // The initial version for x509 certificates is version one
        // and this default value must be an implicit DER encoding.

This fails to build due to c++-style comments in a file built by gcc and not by g++:

egcc -o /data/obj/buildslave/m-a/security/nss/cmd/certutil/keystuff.o -c -O -fPIC -DPIC  -ansi -Wall -Wno-switch -pipe -DOPENBSD -DXP_UNIX -DNSPR20 -UDEBUG -DNDEBUG -pthread -DNSS_ENABLE_ECC -DUSE_UTIL_DIRECTLY -DNO_NSPR_10_SUPPORT -I/data/obj/buildslave/m-a/dist/include/nspr -I/data/obj/buildslave/m-a/dist/include/nspr -I/data/obj/buildslave/m-a/dist/include/nss  -I/data/obj/buildslave/m-a/dist/private/nss  -I/data/obj/buildslave/m-a/dist/include/dbm -I/data/obj/buildslave/m-a/dist/include/seccmd  keystuff.c
certutil.c: In function 'SignCert':
certutil.c:1782:9: error: expected expression before '/' token
         // The initial version for x509 certificates is version one
         ^
certutil.c:1789:15: error: expected expression before '/' token
       case 3: // unspecified format (would be version 4 certificate).

Comment 1

[Landry Breuil (:gaston)]

Attachment: use c-style comments

m-c patch, m-a patch incoming. Dunno what's the procedure to land on projects/nss...

Comment 2

[Landry Breuil (:gaston)]

Same patch applies fine to aurora too

Comment 3

[Landry Breuil (:gaston)]

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/e95573e17075
https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/rev/e42c51afe0cd (with a=NPOTB)

both with DONTBUILD to save cycles..

I suppose that bug can only be fixed once the changeset also lands to projects/nss, but do i have the rights to push there ? are there special rules ?

Comment 4

[Landry Breuil (:gaston)]

needinfo for the nss landing.. apparently i need to also add a patch to security/patches ?

Comment 5

[Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/e95573e17075

Assuming this shouldn't be resolved until it lands upstream.

Comment 6

[Kai Engert (:KaiE:)]

Someone has checked in the patch to NSS on Sunday:
https://hg.mozilla.org/projects/nss/rev/d687ce0acfe1

Comment 7

[Brian Smith (:briansmith, :bsmith, use NEEDINFO?)]

(In reply to Landry Breuil (:gaston) from comment #4)
> needinfo for the nss landing.. apparently i need to also add a patch to
> security/patches ?

Landry:

I'm not sure if you did it already, but make sure that when you do a landing like this that you get approval from a PSM peer or an NSS peer. And, yes, when these landings happen, you need to add the patch to security/patches and you need to update security/patches/README. However, generally, we'll just check the patch in for you into the NSS tree and then pull the updated NSS into mozilla-central right away so we can avoid that altogether.


Note that I didn't update NSS 3.15.5 because NSS 3.15.5 is already released.