* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 08:22:13PM CET: > On Wednesday 05 January 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 06:38:04PM CET: > > > > > + # will take precedence over warning settings defined implicitly by the > > > + # strictness. > > > > Well, this works in the current code base, but only by accident: namely, > > only because process_option_list is only ever called once, and with all > > options at once. > > > Hmm... no, it's potentially called many times in `handle_options()'. > But the later [PATCH 7/9] takes care of this.
Ah, ok. > > If some code later calls it like > > process_option_list (first-set-of-options); > > process_option_list (second-set-of-options); > > > > then things will go wrong again. I suspect that it will mean that > > AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([foreign -Wno-portability]) > > AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = gnu > > > > won't do what we want. Hmm. What exactly is it that we want to happen > > in this case? Should gnu override -Wno-portability if specified in a > > (to-be) higher order place? > > > I assumed without saying that yes, this was to be the intended behaviour. > And I still think it should be. Sorry for not having been explicit about > that before. > > > I see two ways out: warnings are only switched after all options are > > processed. > > > This is not good IMO, as it breaks usages like the the one in your > example above. Makes sense. Thanks for explaining patiently, I think I now understand better. I hope to finish review (and approval) of this patch series this weekend. Cheers, Ralf