Stefano Lattarini skrev 2011-10-19 15:59: > On Wednesday 19 October 2011, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Stefano Lattarini skrev 2011-09-03 09:41: >>> For what concerns this: are you willing to re-submit your patch >>> series about AM_PROG_AR to automake-patches? I will try hard to >>> look into it, if you are willing to do the required testing and >>> to patiently explain to me the details I won't undertand (and >>> be warned that there will probably be many of them, since I'm a >>> total Windows noob). >> >> It is not a patch series, it is single patch that adds a new >> macro that is modeled after AM_PROG_CC_C_O, some tests to catch >> regressions and a plethora of trivial updates to the testsuite. >> > But then we should also add a new `windows' (or better `msvc'?) warning > category, so that we won't force users not interested in MSVC portability > to choose between a mandated use of the new macro (which would probably > be perceived as gratuitous bloating) and the forsaking of all the > portability warnings (which is bad, bad, bad). I don't care whether > this new warning category is introduced by a preparatory patch or by a > follow-up one, as long as it's in place before a merge to `maint' takes > place.
I'm not too fond of any of these names. What if some other non-POSIX archiver materializes? And it seems philosophically wrong to add something as visible as a warning category named after some random 3rd-party-company or non-free-tool. Perhaps -Wno-portability-extra, -Wno-extra-portability or -Wno-extreme-portability? Hmmm, I think my favorite so far is -Wextra-portability, and I think I would like it to work like this: -Wall -> *all* warnings. -Wportability -> portability but not extra-portability -Wextra-portability -> portability *and* extra-portability -Wall -Wno-extra-portability -> Everything but extra-portability. -Wall -Wno-portability -> Neither portability nor extra-portability. So, the special cases are that turning on extra-portability also turns on portability, and turning off portability also turns off extra-portability. Is that too complicated? Should it simply be two orthogonal categories instead? Which, if any, of --gnits, --gnu and --foreign should turn on extra-portability? >> Ah, and the little portability warning of course, triggered when >> building libraries w/o AM_PROG_AR in configure... >> > Yep, see above. And today I agree with you that this warning should be > enabled by `-Wall'. Good, let's keep it that way :-) >> Anyway, I have rebased the patch on top of the current msvc branch >> and have added fixes for fallout in a few new tests etc. >> >> The testsuite is ccccrrrraaaaaawwwwllllliiinnnnngggggg along, I'll >> post the updated patch as soon as it finishes satisfactory. I just >> wanted to post this in case it improves the odds of making the >> release... >> > I'd give at least three weeks before the 1.11.2 beta(s), so there no > need to hurry excessively. But thanks for the heads-up. A few testsuite runs and three weeks is gone in a hurry... Cheers, Peter
