crypto/bio/bio_test.cc - I'm not sure where this was added for, but none
of the functions used there appear to have feature macros documented.
crypto/bio/printf.c - -std=c99 provides (v)snprintf.
crypto/lhash/lhash_test.cc - we no longer call rand_r.
crypto/mem.c - we no longer call strdup and -std=c99 provides (v)snprintf.
Apple messed up their headers and, if _POSIX_C_SOURCE is defined but
_DARWIN_C_SOURCE isn't, pthread.h no longer defines mach_port_t. They
then shipped a version of libc++ headers that is missing this fix, so
the build breaks:
bcc92d75df
If one uses XCode, they've hacked their pthread.h to provide mach_port_t
if defined(__cplusplus), but the standalone tools appear to be old and
missing this.
We can work around this by also defining _DARWIN_C_SOURCE in C++ files
that need _POSIX_C_SOURCE, but it appears none of these files actually
need it.
Change-Id: I5df9453730696100eb22b809febeb65053701322
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/20964
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
This is a memory error for anything other than LHASH_OF(char), which
does not exist.
No code outside the library creates (or even queries) an LHASH, so we
can change this module freely.
Change-Id: Ifbc7a1c69a859e07650fcfaa067bdfc68d83fbbc
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12978
Commit-Queue: David Benjamin <davidben@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Use it to compare the contents of lh and dummy_lh are identical. Leave a
TODO for testing other LHASH cases.
Change-Id: Ifbaf17c196070fdff1530ba0e284030527855f5d
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12977
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
Use a std::map as the dummy lhash and use unique_ptr. This also improves
the test to check on pointer equality; we wish to ensure the lhash
stores the particular pointer value we asked for.
dummy_lh now also owns the pointers. It makes things simpler and since
LHASH doesn't free things, we weren't getting anything out of testing
that.
Change-Id: I97159175ca79a5874586650f272a7846100395e1
Reviewed-on: https://boringssl-review.googlesource.com/12976
Reviewed-by: Adam Langley <agl@google.com>
