Re: timeline garbage in pg_basebackup (was [HACKERS] gcc 4.6 warnings -Wunused-but-set-variable)

2011-04-27 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 20:21, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On ons, 2011-04-27 at 19:17 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 18:55, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> > On tis, 2011-03-29 at 23:48 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> >> The line I marked in pg_basebackup.c might be an actua

Re: timeline garbage in pg_basebackup (was [HACKERS] gcc 4.6 warnings -Wunused-but-set-variable)

2011-04-27 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On ons, 2011-04-27 at 19:17 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 18:55, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On tis, 2011-03-29 at 23:48 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> The line I marked in pg_basebackup.c might be an actual problem: It > >> goes through a whole lot to figure out the

Re: timeline garbage in pg_basebackup (was [HACKERS] gcc 4.6 warnings -Wunused-but-set-variable)

2011-04-27 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 18:55, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On tis, 2011-03-29 at 23:48 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> The line I marked in pg_basebackup.c might be an actual problem: It >> goes through a whole lot to figure out the timeline and then doesn't >> do anything with it. > > This hasn't

Re: [HACKERS] gcc 4.6 warnings -Wunused-but-set-variable

2011-04-27 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tis, 2011-03-29 at 23:48 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > As you might have heard, GCC 4.6 was released the other day. It > generates a bunch of new warnings with the PostgreSQL source code, most > of which belong to the new warning scenario -Wunused-but-set-variable, > which is included in -Wa

timeline garbage in pg_basebackup (was [HACKERS] gcc 4.6 warnings -Wunused-but-set-variable)

2011-04-27 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On tis, 2011-03-29 at 23:48 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > The line I marked in pg_basebackup.c might be an actual problem: It > goes through a whole lot to figure out the timeline and then doesn't > do anything with it. This hasn't been addressed yet. It doesn't manifest itself as an actual pr

Re: [HACKERS] gcc 4.6 warnings -Wunused-but-set-variable

2011-03-30 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > As you might have heard, GCC 4.6 was released the other day.  It > generates a bunch of new warnings with the PostgreSQL source code, most > of which belong to the new warning scenario -Wunused-but-set-variable, > which is included in -Wal

[HACKERS] gcc 4.6 warnings -Wunused-but-set-variable

2011-03-29 Thread Peter Eisentraut
As you might have heard, GCC 4.6 was released the other day. It generates a bunch of new warnings with the PostgreSQL source code, most of which belong to the new warning scenario -Wunused-but-set-variable, which is included in -Wall. Attached is a patch that gets rid of most of these. As you ca