From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33668) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VKtvw-0007mI-BG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 14 Sep 2013 13:47:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VKtvq-0000Do-RR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 14 Sep 2013 13:47:00 -0400 Message-ID: <5234A101.2070506@weilnetz.de> Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2013 19:46:41 +0200 From: Stefan Weil MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1377063869-16834-1-git-send-email-sw@weilnetz.de> <52262A5E.2010507@weilnetz.de> <5234542D.2020400@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <5234812D.8080905@weilnetz.de> <52349F15.3020706@msgid.tls.msk.ru> In-Reply-To: <52349F15.3020706@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH] configure: Enable extra compiler warnings List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Michael Tokarev Cc: qemu-trivial , qemu-devel Am 14.09.2013 19:38, schrieb Michael Tokarev: > 14.09.2013 19:30, Stefan Weil wrote: >> Am 14.09.2013 14:18, schrieb Michael Tokarev: > [] >>> Well. I see at least one hidden flag here which is not covered by the >>> description: >>> >>> -gcc_flags="-Wendif-labels $gcc_flags" >>> +gcc_flags="-fstack-protector-all -Wendif-labels $gcc_flags" >>> >>> Is it intentional? >> >> No, -fstack-protector-all should not be there. It might be a relict of >> a previous patch rebase: I added -Wextra in my local branch a long >> time ago, and -fstack-protector-all was obviously moved to another >> location in configure during that time. >> >> I can send an updated patch later, or you can just remove it from >> my original patch. > > Please take a look at the resulting patch at > http://git.corpit.ru/?p=qemu.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/trivial-patches-next > > and see if this is the patch you want to be applied. > > I verified it compiles on FreeBSD 9.1, but I tried only minimal set > of optional dependencies so things might still break, but I think > we can fix it later. > > If it looks okay, I'll send a pull request today. > > Thanks, > > /mjt It looks good, but I'd prefer my v2: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/274928/. It's nearly identical to your version, but sorts some options alphabetically. Thanks for your work. Stefan