From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21870 invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2006 18:16:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 21859 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Jan 2006 18:16:19 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:16:18 +0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k0FIFh8f012120; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:15:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k0FIFhsh001772; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:15:43 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k0FIFhXF032432; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 19:15:43 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:16:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200601151815.k0FIFhXF032432@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: drow@false.org CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <20060115164908.GA5452@nevyn.them.org> (message from Daniel Jacobowitz on Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:49:08 -0500) Subject: Re: [commit] gdb_bytize arm-tdep.c References: <200601151451.k0FEpVMH010877@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <20060115164908.GA5452@nevyn.them.org> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00170.txt.bz2 > Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 11:49:08 -0500 > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > 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.