From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1K962A-0005SG-JY for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:21:42 -0400 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K9628-0005Rr-Ip for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:21:40 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K9628-0005Rf-3T for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:21:40 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44010 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K9628-0005Rc-0X for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:21:40 -0400 Received: from aybabtu.com ([69.60.117.155]:35080) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K9627-0001D8-JI for grub-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:21:39 -0400 Received: from [192.168.10.10] (helo=thorin) by aybabtu.com with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1K95zh-00026a-NZ for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:19:10 +0200 Received: from rmh by thorin with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1K961b-0006Xu-PN for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:21:07 +0200 Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:21:07 +0200 From: Robert Millan To: The development of GRUB 2 Message-ID: <20080618222107.GB24751@thorin> References: <20080617104448.2b43f109@gibibit.com> <20080617203710.GA31785@thorin> <20080617153154.143e2e20@gibibit.com> <20080618174607.GE25553@thorin> <1213812137.2688.14.camel@dv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1213812137.2688.14.camel@dv> Organization: free as in freedom X-Message-Flag: Worried about Outlook viruses? Switch to Thunderbird! www.mozilla.com/thunderbird X-Debbugs-No-Ack: true User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. Subject: Re: [PATCH] Tidy up 'make' output X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 22:21:40 -0000 On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 02:02:17PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote: > On Wed, 2008-06-18 at 19:46 +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 03:31:54PM -0700, Colin D Bennett wrote: > > > I'm all for warning-free code, but if we try to > > > use -Werror, the code won't even begin to compile in the current state. > > > > Of course, I wasn't proposing to add -Werror in the current state and just > > throw the hot potato into everyone ;-) > > > > Ideally, someone (or all of us ;-)) could do the work to eliminate those > > warnings, then add -Werror, and at that point it's the responsibility of > > every contributor that new code is warning-free. > > There will be some combinations of gcc and libraries that will produce > warnings. It should be easy to turn off -Werror on the make command > line if necessary. > > > So is the proposed situation you don't like, or the path that would be > > needed to archieve it? > > That's OK, but it's doesn't make build system changes unnecessary. The > less noisy build system will help find other messages that -Werror won't > catch, such as linker warnings. It will help understand what is > happening and what is potentially wrong or suboptimal. > > For example, I'm seeing warnings from xfs.c that nobody is fixing. I > can fix the warning by changing the code so that it does exactly what > it's doing now but doesn't cause a warning. The problem is, I don't > see corresponding structures in the Linux xfs code. I don't have time > to investigate xfs implementation to see if I'm possibly hiding a bug. Ok. I got no time to review all the warnings and make -Werror possible atm, but I agree that making them more visible can help archieve that in the long term. > It's also possible that somebody who want to install GRUB in xfs will be > extra cautious when seeing the warning. It's actually a good thing. > Sure, not having the warning will be even better. Based on my daily experience with people installing from packages, I assure you they don't check the code for warnings ;-) -- Robert Millan I know my rights; I want my phone call! What good is a phone call… if you are unable to speak? (as seen on /.)