From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6949 invoked by alias); 2 Jul 2009 14:33:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 6941 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Jul 2009 14:33:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:33:05 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n62EX3D5001726 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2009 10:33:03 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n62EX2vV006749 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2009 10:33:02 -0400 Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-225-36.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.225.36]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n62EX2wt017718; Thu, 2 Jul 2009 10:33:02 -0400 Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 4C1CC3780FF; Thu, 2 Jul 2009 08:33:01 -0600 (MDT) To: "Philip Lee \(IDEAS\)" Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Removing -Wunused warnings References: From: Tom Tromey Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:33:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Philip Lee's message of "Wed\, 1 Jul 2009 15\:54\:09 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-07/txt/msg00009.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Phil" == Philip Lee (IDEAS) writes: Phil> I thought I'd see if I can remove at least some of the 'unused Phil> variable' warnings generated when compiling with -Wunused. I haven't Phil> committed any code before and I figure that's a good way to figure out Phil> the build system and code layout. Sounds good. Phil> I've had a read of the CONTRIBUTING page, but if someone could ping me Phil> as to whether it's better to submit one patch or a series of them and Phil> anything else I'm likely to get wrong I'd appreciate it. Bigger patches are harder to review. So, you're likely to get a response more quickly to smaller patches. Do you have your copyright assignment in place? If not, contact me and I will get you started. It is good to get this out of the way early. The usual stuff people get wrong is formatting nits -- read the GNU coding standards, especially the stuff about formatting C and the stuff about writing ChangeLog entries. Tom