This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: Warnings about rcs_id strings: let's settle this

2003-05-03  Kean Johnston  <>

	* gcc.dg/unused-4.c: Updated to verify 3.2 warning behaviour.

Index: gcc.dg/unused-4.c
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/unused-4.c,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -r1.1 unused-4.c
--- gcc.dg/unused-4.c	3 Apr 2002 22:39:51 -0000	1.1
+++ gcc.dg/unused-4.c	3 May 2003 19:54:32 -0000
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
 /* { dg-options "-Wunused -O3" } */
-static const int i = 0;		/* { dg-warning "defined but not
used" } */
+static const int i = 0;
 static void f() { }		/* { dg-warning "defined but not used" }
 static inline void g() { }

Again I would like to state that this is *UNTESTED BY ME*. I am asking
some help, please. I got rid of my 3.3 tree what works on SCO, my only
easily testable platform right now, so I cannot even verify the accuracy
of this or the code patch it tests. Please can someone with a working
3.3 bootstrap tree apply this (and the corresponding code patch) to help
me verify things. For 3.4 I will be able to run the tests myself. If I
had more time I'd redo my SCO changes for 3.3 but we don't have that
of time right now. If you can help, please let me know the results.

Thank you.

> The test should *prove* you've restored the old behaviour.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]