From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15050 invoked by alias); 16 Mar 2011 15:38:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 15017 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Mar 2011 15:38:35 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:38:31 +0000 Received: (qmail 15673 invoked from network); 16 Mar 2011 15:38:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO scottsdale.localnet) (pedro@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 16 Mar 2011 15:38:27 -0000 From: Pedro Alves To: Tom Tromey Subject: Re: [RFA] New rules for ARI Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:54:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.35-27-generic; KDE/4.6.1; x86_64; ; ) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Joel Brobecker , Pierre Muller , "'Maxim Grigoriev'" References: <4D798969.8070309@tensilica.com> <201103161415.32326.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201103161538.23733.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2011-03/txt/msg00852.txt.bz2 On Wednesday 16 March 2011 15:03:15, Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>> "Pedro" == Pedro Alves writes: > > Pedro> Maybe by including the in-tree readline headers with -isystem > Pedro> rather than -I. I sense that other cases in other libraries > Pedro> will appear though, and that it'd bring in more pain than benefit. > > For free software libraries, we can at least report bugs and assume that > they will be fixed some day. > > The bigger danger would be system libraries; but it would be good enough > if we could use this option on free operating systems. gcc is much more permissive with system libraries than with regular headers. -isystem PATHFOO makes gcc treat headers found in PATHFOO as system headers. Doesn't gcc ignore this warning on declarations coming from system headers? It's actually the opposite that happens: bugs in system headers are more masked than non-system headers'. -- Pedro Alves