From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9254 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751789Ab2JWOpM (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:45:12 -0400 Message-ID: <5086AD74.4070905@RedHat.com> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:45:08 -0400 From: Steve Dickson MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jim Rees CC: Linux NFS Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] Added more compile warning options References: <1350939654-25126-1-git-send-email-steved@redhat.com> <20121022214332.GA14793@umich.edu> In-Reply-To: <20121022214332.GA14793@umich.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hey Jim, On 22/10/12 17:43, Jim Rees wrote: > Steve Dickson wrote: > > To ensure the code compiles cleaner, the following warning options > are now set > -Wall -Wextra -Wstrict-prototypes -Wstrict-aliasing > -Wconversion -Wsign-conversion -Wmissing-prototypes > -Wsign-conversion -pedantic -Wmissing-prototypes > > You only need to specify them once. You've got sign-conversion and > missing-prototypes twice. Yeah... I noticed that after I posted the patch... This was more of an RFC patch than anything... I just wanted to get people's opinion... > Also I think -pedantic is going too far. Why? The one patch its used for does the following: -gss_OID g_mechOid = GSS_C_NULL_OID;; +gss_OID g_mechOid = GSS_C_NULL_OID; Which seems reasonable... What do you see that I don't? steved.