Re: PATCH: Initialize tmp_obstack

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 11:00:32PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> 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?

I'm travelling again - excuse spotty response this week, please.  But
that means I'm hacking on GDB on my laptop again, which is affected by
this problem.

How can we avoid the uninitialized warnings?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery