On Dec 26, 2011, at 6:04 PM, Philip Paeps wrote: > On 2011-12-26 10:10:40 (+0000), Alexander Best <arundel_at_freebsd.org> wrote: >> i grep'ed through src/sys and found several places where WERROR= was set in >> order to get rid of the default -Werror setting. i tried to remove those >> WERROR= overrides from any Makefile, where doing so did not break tinderbox. >> >> in those cases, where it couldn't be completely removed, i added conditions to >> only set WERROR= for the particular achitecture or compiler, where tinderbox >> did not suceed without the WERROR=. > > Wouldn't it be better to set WARNS=x rather than WERROR=? WERROR= says "this > code has bugs, it breaks tinderbox" whereas WARNS=x says "this code has the > following kind of bugs which break tinderbox". Agreed... > Possibly wrapped in an architecture-test where appropriate. Not so much... When you make architecture-specific tests, experience has shown that we don't fix bugs and they languish for a long time. Many times, these warnings are real. Sadly, we've found no way to tag the ones that aren't real yet as safe to ignore... WarnerReceived on Tue Dec 27 2011 - 19:32:14 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:22 UTC