Re: Question on -Werror usage in Makefiles...

[Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>]

"Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> writes:

>  > From: "Zack Weinberg" <zack@codesourcery.com>
>  > 
>  > > Seeing the breakage that this has caused, we have two options: Either
>  > > waiting to get this fixed on all platforms - and I don't have access
>  > > to them and not the time to fix it properly immediatly, or applying
>  > > the appended patch - and reverting again after 3.4 has been branched
>  > > off mainline...
>  > >
>  > > What is the consensus on this?
>  > 
>  > I'd agree, we should drop -Werror now and put it back after 3.4
>  > branches.  People seem to be panicking and submitting dubious patches
>  > rather than fix the warnings properly.
>
> If one recalls that we have --disable-werror and that disabling
> -Werror would be >the default< on the 3.4 (or any) release branch once
> it's created, I would agree that people are indeed panicking.  See
> step 12: http://gcc.gnu.org/branching.html
>
> Nevertheless, I agree we should reattempt this later.

Ok, I reverted it for now.

> PS: Andreas, please change the attribution from me to you in the
> ChangeLog.  I thought I made it clear I wouldn't be able to act as

Done.

> point person in case warning complaints came in but the attribution
> makes it look like I was.  Thanks.

Sorry, I should have taken all the blame - but I wanted to attribute
the patch itself to you and I fear there's no way for this...

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger, aj@suse.de, http://www.suse.de/~aj
  SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, 90429 Nürnberg, Germany
   GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F  FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature