Sent from my iPhone...
On Dec 18, 2011, at 4:20, Daniel Stone <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 11:06:38AM -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: >> On Dec 17, 2011, at 2:35 AM, Julien Cristau wrote: >>> Can we move all the -Werror flags to a devel option instead (ie the >>> strict-compilation flag), and have release builds not use any of them? >>> Pretty please? >> >> The ones that are -Werror=... are the ones that are *really* bad and will >> catch hard to diagnose runtime issues. The strict compilation option that >> currently exists turns all warnings into errors which makes it not >> particularly useful. >> >> I made sure that things built via tinderbox with all these flags for the >> past 2 months before putting out a release based on them, but unfortunately >> there are a few corners that didn't get stressed (like this kdrive LP64 >> case, although I'm surprised I didn't hit it on tifa-linux64 and will look >> into that). > > The problem though is that gcc changes and adds warnings. So you might > be unable to build 1.11.0 on a machine with gcc 4.8.0 or whatever, which > would suck. > That is ixactly why we don't use -Werror! Qe use -Werror=... for a small set of *bad* warnings. > It's definitely important that we make sure our release is as solid as > can be by building with these, but I don't think release builds should > ever have -Werror. And I agree with that, which is why we don't. > > Cheers, > Daniel > _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
