Dne Pá 3. května 2013 10:39:29, Rich Freeman napsal(a):
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:15 AM, hasufell wrote:
> > We don't need that. We already get QA warnings for severe compiler
> > warnings with a note that it should be reported upstream.
> >
> > Turning them into errors does not improve anythin
On Fri, 03 May 2013 16:15:35 +0200
hasufell wrote:
> We don't need that.
I was actually firmly agreeing on that point. The question was where
this was all coming from, and I was pointing out that it's regarded as
inherently good "elsewhere".
> We already get QA warnings for severe compiler
> wa
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:15 AM, hasufell wrote:
> We don't need that. We already get QA warnings for severe compiler
> warnings with a note that it should be reported upstream.
>
> Turning them into errors does not improve anything.
Yup - you can't really compare Gentoo build workflows with thos
On 05/03/2013 03:46 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:06:01 +0800
> Ben de Groot wrote:
>
>> Personally I've always thought -Werror is a mistake in release code,
>> but was accepted practice. I've almost never actively removed it from
>> packages I maintain. That will change now,
On 05/03/2013 09:46 AM, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:06:01 +0800
> Ben de Groot wrote:
>
>> Personally I've always thought -Werror is a mistake in release code,
>> but was accepted practice. I've almost never actively removed it from
>> packages I maintain. That will change now,
On Fri, 3 May 2013 16:06:01 +0800
Ben de Groot wrote:
> Personally I've always thought -Werror is a mistake in release code,
> but was accepted practice. I've almost never actively removed it from
> packages I maintain. That will change now, upon learning of this
> policy.
Debian here and there
On 3 May 2013 16:36, Kacper Kowalik wrote:
> On 03.05.2013 10:06, Ben de Groot wrote:
>> On 3 May 2013 12:09, Ryan Hill wrote:
>>> Most of the bugs filed on the gcc 4.8 tracker so far have been caused by
>>> packages being built with -Werror. I just noticed one package where the
>>> Makefile was
On 03.05.2013 10:06, Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 3 May 2013 12:09, Ryan Hill wrote:
>> Most of the bugs filed on the gcc 4.8 tracker so far have been caused by
>> packages being built with -Werror. I just noticed one package where the
>> Makefile was being patched to remove -g from CXXFLAGS but -Wer
On 3 May 2013 12:09, Ryan Hill wrote:
> Most of the bugs filed on the gcc 4.8 tracker so far have been caused by
> packages being built with -Werror. I just noticed one package where the
> Makefile was being patched to remove -g from CXXFLAGS but -Werror on the same
> line was left in. Just in c
Ryan Hill wrote:
> If you're fixing one of these bugs by silencing the warning be sure
> to remove the flag also.
How about sending the fix upstream instead?
Thanks, from an upstream
//Peter
pgpHGm3ZpE6z3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Most of the bugs filed on the gcc 4.8 tracker so far have been caused by
packages being built with -Werror. I just noticed one package where the
Makefile was being patched to remove -g from CXXFLAGS but -Werror on the same
line was left in. Just in case people weren't aware, building with -Werror
11 matches
Mail list logo
