From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rob Landley Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 14:18:16 -0400 Subject: [Buildroot] make troubles In-Reply-To: <94AB2BC3-0641-400D-9544-89338AD41BE9@cs.auckland.ac.nz> References: <1154584855.22773.13.camel@turing> <200608031639.17238.rob@landley.net> <94AB2BC3-0641-400D-9544-89338AD41BE9@cs.auckland.ac.nz> Message-ID: <200608041418.16879.rob@landley.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Thursday 03 August 2006 8:36 pm, Robert Carter wrote: > I did a svn update to 15773 and ran the build once again with the > same result. > > The good news is that when > > BR_PACKAGE_BUSYBOX_SNAPSHOT > > is not set and busybox-1.2.1 is used the build succeeds. So perhaps > the problem is with some of the recent 'testing' busybox commits. I switched on -Werror to break on warnings during the devel cycle, but different versions of gcc produce different warnings and most of them are entirely spurious. (The gcc developers have this nasty habit of thinking that their compiler is more important that the software it's compiling. If the Linux kernel guys felt that way, we'd need to rebuild the whole of userspace with every dot-release...) I switched them off for 4.1 because lots of the warnings that produces are confirmed non-problems that would cost us size to work around. (If the code does "if(a) x=1; else x=thingy();" then x is _not_ uninitialized after that. Trust me on this one!) As far as warnings go it's a deeply broken compiler and -Werror just isn't feasible. With 4.0 it's mostly warning about things which are at least conceivably real under certain lighting conditions. Rob -- Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.