This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Patch, Fortran, committed] PR36518 - Enable -Werror for libgfortran and fix a warning
- From: FX <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>
- To: Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "'fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:10:38 +0100
- Subject: Re: [Patch, Fortran, committed] PR36518 - Enable -Werror for libgfortran and fix a warning
- References: <4852BFEA.3090201@net-b.de>
In order to ensure this won't happen again, I now build libgfortran
with "-Werror". I hope the latter will not break too many platforms
- on my system (x86-64-gnu-linux) libgfortran builds without any
error/warning, but I'm not positive that this also the case for
other platforms. Hopefully, the fallout (if any) is easily fixable.
The choice not to build libgfortran with -Werror is, I think,
deliberate. Due to the large number of targets on which we have to
build, we shouldn't do it, it will just be too much pain. (I haven't
resources to do a bootstrap right now, but I'm for example almost
sure that with the mingw headers, you'll get some warnings, e.g.
about formats.) And, in any case, if it is decided that -Werror
should be used, it *has* to be disabled by configuring with --disable-
werror, and I don't think your patch does that. We should probably
change our requirements for patches so that patches to the library
require maintainers to check that no new warnings are introduced
(either by grepping the build logs, as I do, or by having an local
modification adding -Werror if their target allows it.)
So, in short, my opinion is:
-- this a a choice to make and not a trivial patch, it should be
discussed (and, personnaly, I'm against it)
-- if you want it, make sure --disable-werror disables it
FX
--
François-Xavier Coudert
http://www.homepages.ucl.ac.uk/~uccafco/