This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: Warnings about rcs_id strings: let's settle this
- From: "Kean Johnston" <jkj at sco dot com>
- To: "'Richard Henderson'" <rth at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "'Joseph S. Myers'" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>,"'Mark Mitchell'" <mark at codesourcery dot com>,"'Zack Weinberg'" <zack at codesourcery dot com>,"'Joe Buck'" <jbuck at synopsys dot com>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>,<gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 3 May 2003 12:49:08 -0700
- Subject: RE: Warnings about rcs_id strings: let's settle this
- Organization: The SCO Group
2003-05-03 Kean Johnston <jkj@sco.com>
* 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
for
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
kind
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.