Re: [commit] gdb_bytize arm-tdep.c

[Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>]

> Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:49:08 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> 
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2006 at 03:51:31PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > I know there are quite a few commercial parties with interests in gdb.
> > Whenever I encounter things like this, I'd almost say they're just a
> > bunch of freeloaders.  Heck, I'l just say it.  They're a bunch of evil
> > capitalist freeloaders.
> > 
> > Daniel, it's things like this why we need to have -Werror by default
> > as soon as possible.
> 
> Mark, please refrain from voicing this opinion on the list, OK?  As one
> of the primary commercial interested parties for this file, I am not an
> evil capitalist freeloader, I'm a busy man with no free time.  I find
> your message remarkably insulting.

Sorry Daniel, it wasn't my intention to personally insult you.  It's
just that I sometimes get very frustrated by the lack of attention
these companies have for things that aren't immedialety visible to
their customers.  Even if they heavily rely on that code.  Take the
code in remote.c for example.  I bet I can find several buffer
overflows in that code in 10 minutes.  Why should I, as a volunteer,
fix that code when there are quite a few people around that make money
of it?

> We need -Werror enabled by default so that someone will feel forced to
> fix up a bunch of semantically _USELESS_ GCC warnings that annoy the
> GDB developers?

If one of the annoyed GDB developers finds a way to silence the
useless GCC warnings introduced in GCC 4, while keeping the useful
warnings, I'm all for it.