Peter Rosin skrev 2011-10-19 18:03: > 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?
Here we go. Add did a second patch with the new warning category. I'm sending the series as replies to this message but will move to automake-patches instead. Cheers, Peter
