Bug#226526: libgtk-perl: implicitly declared function returns a pointer that is used
Package: libgtk-perl
Version: 0.7008-1.9
Severity: important
The following functions are used in your pacakge without being defined
(you probably forgot a header file) in your package, and the return
value is converted to a pointer. This is guaranteed to be fatal on
ia64, and probably any 64-bit architecture.
Function `newSVGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GdkPixbufLoader.c:39
Function `SvGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GdkPixbufLoader.c:58
Function `SvGtkXmHTMLCallbackStruct' implicitly converted to pointer at GtkXmHTML.c:1024
Function `SvGdkImlibImage' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomeCanvasItem.xs:32
Function `newSVGdkImlibImage' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomeCanvasItem.xs:63
Function `newSVGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrinter.c:40
Function `SvGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrinter.c:57
Function `newSVDefEnumHash' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrinter.c:69
Function `SvGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrintMasterPreview.c:36
Function `newSVGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrintMasterPreview.c:49
Function `newSVGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrinterWidget.c:39
Function `SvGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrinterWidget.c:57
Function `newSVGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrinterDialog.c:39
Function `SvGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrinterDialog.c:57
Function `SvGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrintDialog.c:34
Function `newSVDefEnumHash' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrintDialog.c:46
Function `newSVGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrintDialog.c:131
Function `newSVGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrintMaster.c:39
Function `SvGtkObjectRef' implicitly converted to pointer at GnomePrintMaster.c:57
If appropriate, please upgrade this bug to serious.
thanks,
lamont
Reply to: