On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 09:09:10PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > : On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 07:20:46AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > : > On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 07:06:54PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > : > > If you use the argument that one shouldn't set WARNS because a new > : > > compiler will cause the tree to break, then there's no point having it > : > > at all since that condition will always be true. > : > > : > The difference is _impending_. > : > : EPARSE. > > I think that David is trying to say that "Look guys, I'm this >< close > to importing gcc3. It does warnings differently. Cranking up the > WARNS level now will get in the way of my work and will lead to > unnecessary build breakage on some platforms that I don't compile for > all the time. Please go ahead and fix the warnings at the higher > levels, but don't put WARNS=x into the Makefile* until I'm done > importing things." > Nope, what David was _actually_ trying to say is to hold off with WARNS fixes until GCC 3.1 becomes our compiler, because otherwise this is an almost 100% duplicate of efforts, as GCC 3.1 is so WARNS-different from GCC 2.95.3. And of course David should add NO_WERROR (but probably to Makefile.inc1) to avoid world breakage.
Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sunbay Software AG, [EMAIL PROTECTED] FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message