Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Rémi Cardona" <remi@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] FYI: Rules for distro-friendly packages
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 08:15:56
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] FYI: Rules for distro-friendly packages by Enrico Weigelt
Le 26/06/2010 21:39, Enrico Weigelt a écrit :
> #2 One point i don't agree is the "dont add -Werror" rule. actually, > i'm thinking of making -Wall and -Werror mandatory. if some > package doenst build fine, it's simply broken. period.
You're obviously new here... Just take a stroll through bugzilla to see how much we _fight_ against -Werror. Let's see why you obviously have not thought through this completely before writing this : We currently offer 11 different slots of GCC, 3 of gcc-apple, each with multiple versions, 3 versions of llvm-gcc, 2 versions of clang, 7 versions of icc, so in all 26 *major* versions. You do well know that each compiler prints out different warnings for the *same* code... We also offer 10 versions of glibc, 8 versions of uclibc, and 7 versions of klibc. Each version may have header bugs, so may trigger warnings for perfectly good code. And finally we offer 5 unmasked versions of binutils (newer ones even have a brand new linker - gold) and 5 versions of binutils-apple. Again, different tools, different warnings... If you want to make -Werror mandatory, you *MUST* test all combinations above as *THEY ARE ALL SUPPORTED*. Otherwise, packages will break for no good reason and users will hate us. -Werror is a perfectly fine *developer* feature. For example, Gnome autoconf macros enable it for development snapshots, but never ever enable it for stable releases. So please, if you want to write nonsense, don't write it in the name of Gentoo. Rémi PS, Diego (flameeyes) is already having enough issues with his tinderbox running *ONE* compiler/linker/libc combination...


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] FYI: Rules for distro-friendly packages Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@×××××.de>