* Set --disable-werror by default again for the release?
@ 2006-12-04 18:25 Joel Brobecker
2006-12-04 18:47 ` David Daney
2006-12-04 20:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Joel Brobecker @ 2006-12-04 18:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb
Hello,
A user reported that he failed to build GDB on x86-linux, I think
it was RedHat FC 5. The builds are due to warnings beeing treated
as errors.
For the last release, I turned --disable-werror by default because
I didn't want users to get their build stuck because of warnings.
I thought there would be less issues with that with this release,
but maybe I'm wrong.
Because C compilers vary a lot in the warnings they emit, and newer
compilers always find newer warnings, I am starting to think that
we might want to produce all our released with --disable-werror by
default. More work for me, but less hassle for the users...
What does everyone think?
--
Joel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Set --disable-werror by default again for the release?
2006-12-04 18:25 Set --disable-werror by default again for the release? Joel Brobecker
@ 2006-12-04 18:47 ` David Daney
2006-12-04 20:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: David Daney @ 2006-12-04 18:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb
Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hello,
>
> A user reported that he failed to build GDB on x86-linux, I think
> it was RedHat FC 5. The builds are due to warnings beeing treated
> as errors.
>
> For the last release, I turned --disable-werror by default because
> I didn't want users to get their build stuck because of warnings.
> I thought there would be less issues with that with this release,
> but maybe I'm wrong.
>
> Because C compilers vary a lot in the warnings they emit, and newer
> compilers always find newer warnings, I am starting to think that
> we might want to produce all our released with --disable-werror by
> default. More work for me, but less hassle for the users...
>
Possibly less work for you, as you will not have to answer all those
questions about failed builds by telling people to configure with
--disable-werror.
> What does everyone think?
It is a good idea.
David Daney
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Set --disable-werror by default again for the release?
2006-12-04 18:25 Set --disable-werror by default again for the release? Joel Brobecker
2006-12-04 18:47 ` David Daney
@ 2006-12-04 20:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2006-12-04 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joel Brobecker; +Cc: gdb
> Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 10:24:42 -0800
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
>
> Because C compilers vary a lot in the warnings they emit, and newer
> compilers always find newer warnings, I am starting to think that
> we might want to produce all our released with --disable-werror by
> default. More work for me, but less hassle for the users...
>
> What does everyone think?
I think you should leave it as it is for the pretest duration, so we
could catch as many of these problems as we could, and then use
"--disable-werror" in the actual release.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-12-04 20:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-12-04 18:25 Set --disable-werror by default again for the release? Joel Brobecker
2006-12-04 18:47 ` David Daney
2006-12-04 20:32 ` Eli Zaretskii
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox