Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Richard van der Hoff
Richard van der Hoff wrote: > Luis Ontanon wrote: >> On 4/3/07, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I do not think other lex than flex would actually work with all our lexers. >> Few minutes later, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> Now I'm sure they won't: > > Excellent. Wires

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Richard van der Hoff
Luis Ontanon wrote: > On 4/3/07, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I do not think other lex than flex would actually work with all our lexers. > > Few minutes later, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Now I'm sure they won't: Excellent. Wireshark trunk now seems to build clean

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Luis Ontanon
On 4/3/07, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I do not think other lex than flex would actually work with all our lexers. Few minutes later, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Now I'm sure they won't: from http://www.gnu.org/software/flex/manual/html_chapter/flex_20.html The followi

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Richard van der Hoff
Right, it's done... Luis Ontanon wrote: > I do not think other lex than flex would actually work with all our lexers. > > As far as the generated dissectors are delivered in the src tarballs > there's no problem, as the source will compile anyway on any POSIX > system. Windows builds require flex

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Luis Ontanon
I do not think other lex than flex would actually work with all our lexers. As far as the generated dissectors are delivered in the src tarballs there's no problem, as the source will compile anyway on any POSIX system. Windows builds require flex and a make clean. On the other side if I remember

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Joerg Mayer
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 07:26:18PM +0100, Richard van der Hoff wrote: > Richard van der Hoff wrote: > > I'll see what I can do to squash a few. > > I'm just wondering what to do about this one: > > scanner.c:1571: warning: `yyunput' defined but not used > > (for epan/dfilter/scanner.{c,l}, flex

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Richard van der Hoff
Richard van der Hoff wrote: > I'll see what I can do to squash a few. I'm just wondering what to do about this one: scanner.c:1571: warning: `yyunput' defined but not used (for epan/dfilter/scanner.{c,l}, flex 2.5.33, gcc 3.3.6) Ideally we'd add --nounput to the flex cmdline or "%option nounput

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Joerg Mayer
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:57:11AM -0700, Gerald Combs wrote: > It depends on the builder: > > Ubuntu: gcc version 4.1.2 20060928 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.1-13ubuntu5) > OS X: gcc version 3.3 20030304 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 1666) > Solaris: gcc version 4.0.2 btw: could buildbot send mails to

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Gerald Combs
Richard van der Hoff wrote: > Stephen Fisher wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 03:11:38PM +0100, Richard van der Hoff wrote: >> >>> I guess I'm not quite up to speed with the state of this project... Am >>> I right in thinking that warnings have only been purged successfully >>> so far for the wi

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Richard van der Hoff
Stephen Fisher wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 03:11:38PM +0100, Richard van der Hoff wrote: > >> I guess I'm not quite up to speed with the state of this project... Am >> I right in thinking that warnings have only been purged successfully >> so far for the win32 build? I can't build on linux

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Stephen Fisher
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 03:11:38PM +0100, Richard van der Hoff wrote: > I guess I'm not quite up to speed with the state of this project... Am > I right in thinking that warnings have only been purged successfully > so far for the win32 build? I can't build on linux yet with > --warnings-as-err

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-03 Thread Richard van der Hoff
Ulf Lamping wrote: > I'm very pleased to notice that my "call for a warning free" Wireshark > was heard and was being answered ;-) > > The buildbot is now "all green" again, even with the "treat warning as > error" setting in the buildbot makefiles. > I guess I'm not quite up to speed with the

Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-04-02 Thread Graham Bloice
Ulf Lamping wrote: > Hi List! > > I would like to say a big THANK YOU to all the developers involved in > the "virtual warning fix" party of recent days! > > :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) > :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

[Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!

2007-03-31 Thread Ulf Lamping
Hi List! I would like to say a big THANK YOU to all the developers involved in the "virtual warning fix" party of recent days! :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) I'm very