On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Ryan Hill <dirtye...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:49:18 -0500 > Gabriel Dos Reis <g...@integrable-solutions.net> wrote: > >> If we include a warning in -Wall then it is because we believe it to be >> generally useful and likely to uncover common bugs/mistakes. It is therefore >> reasonable for users to issue -Wall -Werror even in application delivery >> mode. > > Arg, no. -Werror is very useful for development and I'm sure that code > quality increases because of it, but it should never be enabled by default for > releases. I think about 80% of the bugs we've had filed so far for packages > failing to build against 4.8 are due to -Werror.
The fact that you have 80% failing to build is not in itself an argument for not including -Werror in release mode. The real issue is whether those warnings uncovered any real bugs. If they don't, then either we are emitting too many false positives, or those packages should have turned off the offending diagnostics. > Also, several distros patch > gcc to enable additional warnings by default (eg. Debian, Ubuntu, and Gentoo > enable -Wformat=security) that upstream may not see or be interested in. It's > a > big enough headache that we had to ban use of -Werror from our tree (instead > we > flag important warnings and output them at the end of the build). Well, the issue isn't as clear cut as you make it sound. Some distros build service monitor compiler outputs for some of these warnings and abort builds even if the package does not supply -Werror. -- Gaby
