Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 05:23:56PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> It turns out that gcc warns about it anyway. Does anyone have some sort
>> of clever recipe to catch warnings more easily than by carefully
>> reading the make output or manually grepping build log files or
>> something?
> Perhaps something we could have the buildfarm do as well, if it can be
> automated?
I tend to do "make >make.out 2>make.err" and then look at make.err.
The normal situation with a gcc build is that make.err contains one or
two warnings due to flex's bad habits. We could possibly get that down
to zero if we wanted to work at it. However, most non-gcc compilers
I've looked at generate dozens of mostly-silly warnings, so I'm not sure
if the buildfarm could use this technique or not.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
