Colin Walters wrote:
> What I've been doing for years now is to carry a baseline set of
> "warnings that must be errors" in my projects, like:
>
> https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/blob/master/configure.ac#L19
This makes sense, but: ewww, -Werror=declaration-after-statement, do you
really stil
Adam Williamson wrote:
> Yes, it's really bad. Look at the list of bugs marked as depending on
> it:
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1393164 (owncloud)
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401172 (libldb)
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401175 (libtdb)
> ht
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016, at 08:26 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> An alternative proposal: add a opt-out/opt-in flag (similar to
> _hardened_build)
> %global _strict_c_flags 0/1
What I've been doing for years now is to carry a baseline set of
"warnings that must be errors" in my projects, l
On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:24:41AM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> So, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401231 seems to be
> basically breaking everything in Rawhide at present.
>
> Rather than having a bug where people are trying to figure out on the
> fly how to deal with the RPM mac
On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 23:02 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 12/06/2016 09:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > Well, assuming you're including ldb and tdb in 'samba', no, I don't
> > think we know that yet.
>
> libldb and libtdb use waf, the Samba build system, and are closely
> related to Samb
On 12/06/2016 09:28 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
Well, assuming you're including ldb and tdb in 'samba', no, I don't
think we know that yet.
libldb and libtdb use waf, the Samba build system, and are closely
related to Samba.
If it were just Samba, fixing Samba would be the right course of a
On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 21:15 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1393164 (owncloud)
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401172 (libldb)
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401175 (libtdb)
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.c
On 12/06/2016 08:50 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 20:41 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 12/06/2016 08:36 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
On 6 December 2016 at 19:24, Adam Williamson wrote:
So, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401231 seems to be
basically breaking every
On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 08:41:46PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 12/06/2016 08:36 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
> >On 6 December 2016 at 19:24, Adam Williamson
> >wrote:
> >>So, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401231 seems to be
> >>basically breaking everything in Rawhide at present.
On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 20:41 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 12/06/2016 08:36 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
> > On 6 December 2016 at 19:24, Adam Williamson
> > wrote:
> > > So, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401231 seems to be
> > > basically breaking everything in Rawhide at present.
On 12/06/2016 08:36 PM, James Hogarth wrote:
On 6 December 2016 at 19:24, Adam Williamson wrote:
So, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401231 seems to be
basically breaking everything in Rawhide at present.
Rather than having a bug where people are trying to figure out on the
fly ho
On 6 December 2016 at 19:24, Adam Williamson wrote:
> So, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401231 seems to be
> basically breaking everything in Rawhide at present.
>
> Rather than having a bug where people are trying to figure out on the
> fly how to deal with the RPM macro change, an
So, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1401231 seems to be
basically breaking everything in Rawhide at present.
Rather than having a bug where people are trying to figure out on the
fly how to deal with the RPM macro change, and probably more packages
are getting rebuilt and broken all th
13 matches
Mail list logo