Re: [PATCH 2/2] ci: let pedantic job compile with -Og

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> So for the pedantic warnings, we're left with a guess as to whether -Og
> or -O2 will yield more results. And in my experience it is probably -O2.
>
> If we want to get coverage of -Og, I'd suggest doing it in a job that is
> otherwise overlapping with another (maybe linux-TEST-vars, which I think
> is otherwise a duplicate build?).

The same knee-jerk reaction came to me.

Speaking of variants, is there any interest in migrating one or some
of the existing x86-64 CI jobs to arm64 CI jobs GitHub introduced
recently?  I suspect that we won't find any endianness bugs (I
expect they are configured to do little endian just like everybody
else) and there may no longer be lurking unaligned read bugs (but
"git log --grep=unaligned" finds surprising number of them we have
seen and fixed), so the returns may be very small.

> Your command above also loses the "-g" and "-Wall" from the default
> CFLAGS. Maybe OK, since DEVELOPER=1 implies -Wall anyway, and "-g" isn't
> important. But one thing I've done for a long time in my config.mak is:
>
>   O ?= 2
>   CFLAGS = -g -Wall -O$(O)
>
> Then you can "make O=0" or "make O=g" if you want. And I think that
> setting O=g in the environment (exported) would work, as well.

I do something similar, but my $(O) replaces the whole -O2 thing, so
I can say something silly like

    make O="-O2 -g -Wall"