| 1 |
On 9/10/18 11:19 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: |
| 2 |
> It is indeed an insurmountable task to write code that is warning-free |
| 3 |
> from the beginning across architectures, compiler versions, etc. But |
| 4 |
> that is not the goal anyway. It is examining the situation and taking |
| 5 |
> appropriate action, and then applying a change to no longer cause that |
| 6 |
> particular warning (or make it non-fatal if the warning is bogus/harmless). |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
sure, but for upstreams that make this an explicit goal, do we really |
| 9 |
want to apply additional downstream pataches with the additional |
| 10 |
complexity that carries for build system (autotools re-generation that |
| 11 |
might make it unsupported upstream etc) ? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
-- |
| 14 |
Kristian Fiskerstrand |
| 15 |
OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net |
| 16 |
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3 |
Archives