On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 12:09:14 Tomasz Kloczko wrote: > What I'm trying to tell is that as long > as suppressing such warnings is hard coded in spec files it > decreases probability of fixing the code.
Because you are trying to use wrong tools to capture compiler warnings from Fedora packages. I suggested you to use csmock, which is able to override compiler flags that are hard-coded in spec files. Did you try it? > Packages build logs are preserved and served publicly. > Number of all compile warnings says something as well about general "heal"s > of the source code. > > > xscreensaver.spec:export CFLAGS="$CFLAGS *-Wno*-long-long" > > > xscreensaver.spec:export CFLAGS="$CFLAGS *-Wno*-variadic-macros" > > > > These are harmless to disable, but also redundant. Fedora's GCC > > defaults to C11 which supports long long and variadic macros, so won't > > warn about them anyway. > > > > Not everything in your report is a problem. Automatically emailing > > somebody from upstream or refusing to allow those -Wno-* options in > > spec files would not improve Fedora measurably. > > Please "#define problem". The problem is that you are proposing spec file changes that are not going to improve the situation. Kamil _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
