On Wed, 8 Feb 2017, Andrew Cagney wrote:
-fno-strict-aliasing dates back to at least 2012 and 380de4f526c86b03cdb7fa58b7af0d2aaa191c8c. I don't believe we've any evidence for or against having this option
I recently tried building without it, and it does compile without errors. However, I did read some articles that told me it is just safer to never let the compiler guess, and stick with -fno-strict-aliasing. I'm not a compiler expert, so my opinion on this should not have too much weight.
That leaves -DFORCE_PR_ASSERT which dates back to https://lists.libreswan.org/pipermail/swan-dev/2014-February/000088.html I suspect it is no longer needed since all calls to PR_ASSERT seem to have disappeared. I'll remove it from USERCOMPILE and define it elsewhere.
Yes, I removed them in 72d8c9846ee736 when I realised that without defining FORCE_PR_ASSERT, it would actually not passert on those PR_ASSERT's and the code would continue to run unexpectedly. I was probably also the one that added it after realising we were using PR_ASSERT without FORCE_PR_ASSERT and thus not actually failing properly. So in that way, Andrew is right. This is exactly why we have USERCOMPILE. Paul _______________________________________________ Swan-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libreswan.org/mailman/listinfo/swan-dev
