From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10750 invoked by alias); 24 Nov 2003 22:08:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 10743 invoked from network); 24 Nov 2003 22:08:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.105) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Nov 2003 22:08:58 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC9BD2B8F; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:08:54 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FC28176.5020908@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:08:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [commit] Deprecate remaining STREQ uses References: <3FC119EB.1060102@gnu.org> <3FC234C0.1000500@gnu.org> <20031124165047.GA2227@nevyn.them.org> <3FC25DCF.7060508@gnu.org> <20031124205432.GA18415@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-11/txt/msg00549.txt.bz2 > At least one now :) There are a number of other solutions to this. > Have you considered making the ARI mail contributors for certain > (low-false-positive) categories? Like, for instance, this one. The > gcc-regression mailing list has several scripts to pull the ChangeLog > entries since the last run and mail victims. It's extremely effective. I find the GCC script anything but effective. I get spammed everytime I commit something to GCC - a very negative experience for an infrequent GCC committer. I've now been conditioned into ignoring that mail :-( Contrast that to -Werror (yes ok, it isn't a requirement) and gdb_mbuild.sh. By encouraging their use we make it possible for people to address the problems _before_ they become an issue. That way the contributor and maintainer don't even need to discuss them. For something like the ARI to be mainlined, it would need to be integrated into the build process in a way that didn't leave the user confused (a standard build would have to be 100% warning free - something that at present is impossible to achieve). enjoy, Andrew