From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26620 invoked by alias); 25 Dec 2006 04:00:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 26611 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Dec 2006 04:00:46 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 Dec 2006 04:00:36 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Gyh0q-0007ju-DA; Sun, 24 Dec 2006 23:00:32 -0500 Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 04:00:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, "H.J. Lu" Subject: Re: PATCH: Initialize tmp_obstack Message-ID: <20061225040032.GA29719@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Mark Kettenis , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, "H.J. Lu" References: <20061202182712.GA623@lucon.org> <20061205204003.GB25572@nevyn.them.org> <12601.163.1.150.229.1165354805.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> <20061205214306.GA29801@nevyn.them.org> <20637.163.1.150.229.1165355320.squirrel@webmail.xs4all.nl> <20061205215639.GA30371@nevyn.them.org> <20061205235848.GA2551@nevyn.them.org> <20061207144018.GA12915@nevyn.them.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061207144018.GA12915@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-12/txt/msg00313.txt.bz2 On Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 09:40:18AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 06:58:48PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > Since there's disagreement about this patch, I have reverted it. We > > can put it back in when there's consensus. > > Unfortunately, when I reverted it the discussion stopped dead without > advancing towards consensus. > > What do we do about this warning? No one has replied. While I agree that GCC is not being very helpful here, I don't anticipate a reliable compiler fix, and it's really beginning to frustrate me that I can't use -Werror on my laptop (I'm travelling). Mark, how strongly do you object to HJ's workaround? If it's unacceptable, will you volunteer to simplify the affected functions to avoid the warning? -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery