Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@...>
Subject: Re: -Werror unwanted?
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 02:52:07 +0300
On 14/05/12 23:42, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
>>> I personally think that if an upstream says that no warnings must be
>>> produced by the code, and a developer should look at them before
>>> declaring any warnings safe, then that is best followed.
>>
>> Upstream does not need to take into account warnings produced by
>> compilers for lesser known architectures, as explained above.
>
> These warnings could be harmless or introduce silent breakage. The user
> often can't tell.

You can have breakage without any warnings being emitted, and you can 
have warnings that result in no breakage whatsoever.

Furthermore, -Werror on Gentoo makes zero sense; portage will already 
produce a QA notice with warnings that have the potential to result in 
breakage.  -Werror is not needed.



References:
-Werror unwanted?
-- hasufell
Re: -Werror unwanted?
-- Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
Re: -Werror unwanted?
-- Jeroen Roovers
Re: -Werror unwanted?
-- Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: -Werror unwanted?
Next by thread:
Re: -Werror unwanted?
Previous by date:
Re: Stability of /sys api
Next by date:
Re: Stability of /sys api


Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.