Sean McGovern <[email protected]> writes:

> On Tuesday, December 20, 2011, Mans Rullgard <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>  configure |    1 +
>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/configure b/configure
>> index 22542af..672ed31 100755
>> --- a/configure
>> +++ b/configure
>> @@ -3116,6 +3116,7 @@ elif enabled gcc; then
>>     check_cflags -fno-tree-vectorize
>>     check_cflags -Werror=implicit-function-declaration
>>     check_cflags -Werror=missing-prototypes
>> +    check_cflags -Werror=declaration-after-statement
>>  elif enabled llvm_gcc; then
>>     check_cflags -mllvm -stack-alignment=16
>>  elif enabled clang; then
>> --
>
> Not opposed to this in principle, but can it wait until we decide what to
> do with libpostproc? It will break the ppc{32,64} build as the altivec code
> in postproc has a ton of these C90 violations.

I noticed.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to