Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Add a couple new warnings to QA check
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 06:30:34
Message-Id: 45FE2DD8.2030605@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-portage-dev] Add a couple new warnings to QA check by Ryan Hill
1 Ryan Hill wrote:
2 > Hey all.
3 >
4 > I'd like to add two warnings to the QA GCC warning message reporter for
5 > GCC 4.2.
6 >
7 > The first is a new warning that is given when GCC makes an optimization
8 > assuming that overflow for operations on signed ints is undefined, as
9 > per the standard. Apparently a lot of code assumes that it will wrap
10 > instead. The reason for this warning is the new -fstrict-overflow flag
11 > that is enabled at >= -O2. The warning will only appear with the
12 > -Wstrict-overflow flag set, but it is enabled by -Wall so it will be
13 > seen pretty often.
14 >
15 > The other is actually a warning already present in <=4.1. 4.2 now
16 > forbids function casts and will actually generate a runtime abort in the
17 > code if they're used. This is bad because the code will compile fine
18 > but then segfault when executed :(. openssl is a good example (bug
19 > #158324). This warning is always reported, even without -Wall. I hope
20 > this check will help identify packages that might not be GCC 4.2 ready.
21
22
23 If you expect these warnings to be *fixed* by developers please provide
24 documentation to enable developers to do so. SpanKY has some docs in
25 trunk/doc/ for this express purpose. As much as I love QA checks I
26 really don't like forcing them on people (doubly so for a failure mode
27 check like this) without giving people advice on how to fix them.
28
29 Thanks,
30
31 -Alec
32 --
33 gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Add a couple new warnings to QA check Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>