From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1124 invoked by alias); 1 Aug 2003 16:33:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 1117 invoked from network); 1 Aug 2003 16:33:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Aug 2003 16:33:40 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.20 #1 (Debian)) id 19icqa-0000i8-1j for ; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 12:33:40 -0400 Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 16:33:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb Subject: Re: -Wformat Message-ID: <20030801163340.GA2673@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb References: <3F2A903E.9000908@redhat.com> <3F2A9586.3000704@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F2A9586.3000704@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-08/txt/msg00008.txt.bz2 On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 12:29:58PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > > > >Yup. And further down in the log, you'll run into stuff like > > > > fprintf_filtered (stream, local_octal_format_prefix ()); > > > >which could easily be fixed by using fputs_filtered. > > Outch, that's just bad. > > >>While getting the option working with a current GCC could mean more > >>work, I'm not convinced that it's a bad idea. > > > > > >You're right: I was too pessimistic. I just want the > >-Wformat-nonliteral patch reverted in the meantime. :-) (Actually, if > >you want to fix the warnings in question quickly, that's fine with me > >too: I can easily revert it on my local tree.) > > But it `works for me'. Can you fix the obvious ones and leave me with > the messier problems, say? It's hardly David's fault you're still using a stone-age compiler :) *ducks* -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer