yeah, I think if upstream is not taking this patch lets disable the warning
temporarily and see what lands as right fix.

On Wed, Jun 3, 2026 at 5:00 AM Jeroen Hofstee via lists.openembedded.org
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Markus,
>
> On 6/3/26 10:35, Markus Volk wrote:
>
> However, 'Rejected' seemed like a somewhat inappropriate upstream status
> as well, since this was just an issue,
> not a pull request, and the solution was even suggested by the maintainer
> himself. He just hasn't been able
> to reproduce the problem yet, so more feedback is needed to convince him
> that people have an issue here.
>
> Who's to blame is a different story :)
>
> That's why I chose 'Pending', but if necessary I can of course make this
> 'Rejected'.
>
>
> Don't get me wrong btw, I don't really mind the patch, I mind the warning.
>
> Since it flags there "might" be an issue there.
> Maintainer looks at it, euuh no, there is now issue -> closes issue.
> But that warnings is still there, so OE gets patched and marked as pending,
> that is asking for that patch to pending for a long time.
>
> That makes the "pending" state a bit doubtful. And I agree with you that
> rejected is at the opposite end.
>
> As said, I don't really mind, I just don't like a "possible" issue taking
> time
> of several people.
>
> For what it is worth btw, char a[1000] = {0}; will initialize the whole
> array.
>
> I doubt it matters in this case, but it likely does cost you runtime
> performance,
> just to get rid of a likely useless warning.
>
> Regards,
> Jeroen
>
> 
>
>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#127413): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-devel/message/127413
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/119559653/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-devel/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to