On 9/10/18 11:21 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 9/10/18 11:19 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: >> It is indeed an insurmountable task to write code that is warning-free >> from the beginning across architectures, compiler versions, etc. But >> that is not the goal anyway. It is examining the situation and taking >> appropriate action, and then applying a change to no longer cause that >> particular warning (or make it non-fatal if the warning is bogus/harmless). > > sure, but for upstreams that make this an explicit goal, do we really > want to apply additional downstream pataches with the additional > complexity that carries for build system (autotools re-generation that > might make it unsupported upstream etc) ? >
in all fairness, for one of my upstream packages, SKS, we make -Werror part of non-release versions but remove it for releases. But there are certain crypto related packages where you want the ensure it is properly handle altogether, in particular where RNG is concerned as there isn't really a proper way to test for it afterwards.. for other packages the test suite is of great importance.. if the tests are proper there isn't a great need, but sadly packages today doesn't really come with proper test suits -- Kristian Fiskerstrand OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
