Sent from my iPhone...
On Dec 20, 2011, at 5:58, Gaetan Nadon <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 18:50 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: >> >> Provide end users with a workaround if they find code doesn't build with >> the -Werror=... flags provided by BASE_CFLAGS. This can be useful if >> newer util-macros are used with older source code that had problems, or >> in the rare case when warnings are expanded to hit more cases (although >> this case should not happen too much in practice). >> >> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Huddleston <[email protected]> >> --- >> xorg-macros.m4.in | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/xorg-macros.m4.in b/xorg-macros.m4.in >> index d9ed137..22f537b 100644 >> --- a/xorg-macros.m4.in >> +++ b/xorg-macros.m4.in >> @@ -1520,6 +1520,12 @@ m4_foreach([flag], m4_cdr($@), [ >> AC_DEFUN([XORG_COMPILER_FLAGS], [ >> AC_REQUIRE([XORG_COMPILER_BRAND]) >> >> +AC_ARG_ENABLE(selective-werror, >> + AS_HELP_STRING([--disable-selective-werror], >> + [Turn off selective compiler errors, please >> report bugs if you find you need to use this. (default: enabled)]), > Help text not appropriate, please remove "please report bugs..." Read on for > an alternative. > --disable-selective-werror > Turn off selective compiler errors, please report > bugs if you find you need to use this. (default: > enabled) > --disable-selective-werror > Turn off selective compiler errors (default: > enabled) > > One question: if both --disable-selective-werror and > --enable-strict-compilation are used together, does the resulting behavior > make sense? Which one overrides the other, if any? > well the use case doesnt make sense ... but the behavior does ... the -Werror=... become -W... and -Werror is added , so strict behaviorially overrides it. >> + [SELECTIVE_WERROR=$enableval], >> + [SELECTIVE_WERROR=yes]) >> + >> # -v is too short to test reliably with XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG >> if test "x$SUNCC" = "xyes"; then >> BASE_CFLAGS="-v" >> @@ -1557,6 +1563,8 @@ XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG([BASE_CFLAGS], [-Wredundant-decls]) >> >> # Turn some warnings into errors, so we don't accidently get successful >> builds >> # when there are problems that should be fixed. >> + >> +if test "x$SELECTIVE_WERROR" = "xyes" ; then >> XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG([BASE_CFLAGS], [-Werror=implicit], >> [-errwarn=E_NO_EXPLICIT_TYPE_GIVEN -errwarn=E_NO_IMPLICIT_DECL_ALLOWED]) >> XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG([BASE_CFLAGS], [-Werror=nonnull]) >> XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG([BASE_CFLAGS], [-Werror=init-self]) >> @@ -1570,6 +1578,21 @@ XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG([BASE_CFLAGS], >> [-Werror=write-strings]) >> XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG([BASE_CFLAGS], [-Werror=address]) >> XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG([BASE_CFLAGS], [-Werror=int-to-pointer-cast], >> [-errwarn=E_BAD_PTR_INT_COMBINATION]) >> XORG_TESTSET_CFLAG([BASE_CFLAGS], [-Werror=pointer-to-int-cast]) # Also >> -errwarn=E_BAD_PTR_INT_COMBINATION >> +else > Consider adding AC_MSG_WARN to replace help text above. It will show up in > the log for all to see. You can use $PACKAGE_BUGREPORT to provide URL. > This is what we do for other situations where a module configuration is > questionable but not in error. > We are in the warning business :-) ok >
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
