* Peter Wemm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020227 15:44] wrote: > Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > * Matthew Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020227 14:51] wrote: > > > > > > : > > > :ok so I leave it to other people to fix LINT > > > :I'm not going near it any more > > > > > > It's the responsibility of whoever added -Werror to the default > > > compile to unbreak the tree, either by fixing the problem or by > > > backing out his commit. > > > > No. Leave it in, this will benifit us all in the long run. > > > > In fact it was the _only_ way I was able to get people clean > > up bad code at a former job and I strongly support keeping > > -Weerror enabled. > > If there are files that are too hard to fix, or vendor files, or the fix > isn't clear, we should use the nowerror conf/files* flags. > > It is important that we stop new warnings turning up when the compile > output is so damn large that it hides things. > > I will do a pass over things now and see what I can do.
Agreed, any doofus that obfuscates code to mask a warning gets a kick in the pants at the next BSDcon. If you don't know then ask. (I know I'll be asking Bruce/Peter if I have a problem) -- -Alfred Perlstein [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' Tax deductible donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message