Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Commit f5cbdbc2 authored by gnzlbg's avatar gnzlbg
Browse files

Clean libc-test for apple targets

This cleans up the build.rs of `libc-test` for apple targets.

I wanted to update the docker containers of some targets so that we can start
testing newer currently-skipped APIs properly, but it is impossible to figure
out which headers and APIs are skipped for each target.

This PR separates the testing of apple targets into its own self-contained
function. This allows seeing exactly which headers are included, and which items
are skipped. A lot of work will be required to separate the testing of all major
platforms and make the script reasonable.

During the clean up, I discovered that, at least for apple targets, deprecated
but not removed APIs are not tested. I re-enabled testing for those, and fixed
`daemon`, which was not properly linking its symbol. I also added the
`#[deprecated]` attribute to the `#[deprecated]` APIs of the apple targets. The
attribute is available since Rust 1.9.0 and the min. Rust version we support is
Rust 1.13.0.

Many other APIs are also currently not tested "because they are weird" which I
interpret as "the test failed for an unknown reason", as a consequence:

* the signatures of execv, execve, and execvp are incorrect (see
  https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/issues/1272)

* the `sig_t` type is called `sighandler_t` in libc for some reason:
  https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/issues/1273

This probably explains why some other things, like the
`sa_handler`/`sa_sigaction` fields of `sigaction` were skipped. The field is
actually a union, which can be either a `sig_t` for the `sa_handler` field, or
some other type for the `sa_sigaction` field, but because the distinction was
not made, the field was not checked.

The latest ctest version can check volatile pointers, so a couple of skipped
tests are now tested using this feature.
parent 8c571e0c
No related branches found
No related tags found
Loading
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment