This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug middle-end/40500] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148512 failed to build binutils
- From: "mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 24 Aug 2009 16:10:19 -0000
- Subject: [Bug middle-end/40500] [4.5 Regression] Revision 148512 failed to build binutils
- References: <bug-40500-682@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #9 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-24 16:10 -------
I think maybe it's time for me to get a brain transplant. I had totally
forgotten the previous conversation, and read through this entire issue
yesterday, and then spent some time thinking about the issue, and clearly
reached a totally opposite conclusion. I guess since me and anti-me have
different opinions, that just comes out to a zero.
I think the opinion I expressed in the previous message holds in general,
though; we shouldn't treat adding a warning to -Wall as inherently bad, even
though of course every new warning will break some build that uses -Wall
-Werror.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40500