On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 07:06:54PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
If you use the argument that one shouldn't set WARNS because a new
compiler will cause the tree to break, then there's no point having it
at all since that condition will always be true.
The difference is _impending_.
--
--
On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 07:20:46AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 07:06:54PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
If you use the argument that one shouldn't set WARNS because a new
compiler will cause the tree to break, then there's no point having it
at all since that
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 07:20:46AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
: On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 07:06:54PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote:
: If you use the argument that one shouldn't set WARNS because a new
: compiler
On Sun, Feb 03, 2002 at 07:51:52AM -0800, Mark Murray wrote:
markm 2002/02/03 07:51:52 PST
Modified files:
lib/libpam Makefile.inc
Log:
Turn on fascist warning mode.
Revision ChangesPath
1.4 +3 -1 src/lib/libpam/Makefile.inc
This delta
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 03:30:32PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
This delta breaks buildworld. gcc(1) has a known bug-feature
of hiding some errors in standard system headers, making them
invisible without -I.
...
and compile now can't survive the WARNS=4.
Not to mention there is ZERO way
David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Not to mention there is ZERO way this code will pass WARNS=4 for GCC 3.
Please Committers, do not try to WARNS code right now -- there just is no
use. It will only get in the way later.
Well, of course feel free to make the code changes, but PLEASE
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 09:17:17AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 03:30:32PM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
This delta breaks buildworld. gcc(1) has a known bug-feature
of hiding some errors in standard system headers, making them
invisible without -I.
...
and
