On Apr 22, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Stephen Fisher wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:37:24PM -0700, Guy Harris wrote: > >> A bug on the inability to get clang to reject *as an error rather than >> as a warning* an unknown -f flag has been filed. (You can get it to >> reject unknown -W flags as errors with >> -Werror=unknown-warning-option.) > > Thanks. That would make the AC_WIRESHARK_GCC_CFLAGS_CHECK() to realize > that it isn't an acceptable option wouldn't it?
Using -Werror=unknown-warning-option in AC_WIRESHARK_GCC_CFLAGS_CHECK(), which we do in the trunk, does, in fact, make AC_WIRESHARK_GCC_CFLAGS_CHECK() recognize unknown -W flags as unacceptable options. However, -Werror=unknown-warning-option does *NOT* affect the treatment of unknown -f options, so -fexcess-precision=fast is still not recognized by AC_WIRESHARK_GCC_CFLAGS_CHECK() as unacceptable to clang. That's why the bug in question was filed against clang. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
