This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH v4 04/20] add configury
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, bonzini at gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:25:16 -0600
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/20] add configury
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1379945520-3839-1-git-send-email-tromey at redhat dot com> <1379945520-3839-5-git-send-email-tromey at redhat dot com> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1309272239160 dot 2211 at trevally dot site>
Gerald> And looking at the code, I see
Gerald> +COMPILE.base = $(COMPILER) -c $(ALL_COMPILERFLAGS) $(ALL_CPPFLAGS) -o $@
Gerald> Where does $(ALL_COMPILERFLAGS) compile from?
Look a little further down in the patch:
- $(COMPILER) -c $(ALL_COMPILERFLAGS) $(ALL_CPPFLAGS) $< $(OUTPUT_OPTION)
+ $(COMPILE) $<
... that is, the patches didn't change this part. ALL_COMPILERFLAGS was
used before and it is used now. I don't think this series touched how
this variable is computed, either.
Gerald> If I read the code
Gerald> right, we do disable these warnings for the stage1 build. However,
Gerald> the install compiler is the same -- so I guess we should disable
Gerald> warnings there, too?
I'm afraid I don't understand.
If I were debugging this then I think I would start by looking in
config.log to see why the compiler accepted -Wno-narrowing.
Actually, I looked in my own config.log and I see it isn't very
configure:6280: checking whether gcc supports -Wnarrowing
configure:6306: result: yes
I suppose I would hack in a "set -x" / "set +x" pair into configure
around the warning-checking section and then see what happens.