On 20/10/2017 17:32, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 10/20/17 17:09, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 20/10/2017 17:08, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>> My remark below might matter even less, but:
>>>
>>> I'd find it regrettable if we suppressed a wrong gcc warning about a
>>> valid C construct by replacing the constru
On 10/20/17 17:09, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 20/10/2017 17:08, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> On 10/20/17 13:02, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> On 20/10/2017 12:48, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 20 October 2017 at 11:12, Paolo Bonzini
wrote:
> GCC 4.9 and newer stopped warning for missing braces around
On 20/10/2017 17:08, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 10/20/17 13:02, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 20/10/2017 12:48, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On 20 October 2017 at 11:12, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
GCC 4.9 and newer stopped warning for missing braces around the
"universal" C zero initializer {0}. One s
On 10/20/17 13:02, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 20/10/2017 12:48, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 20 October 2017 at 11:12, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> GCC 4.9 and newer stopped warning for missing braces around the
>>> "universal" C zero initializer {0}. One such initializer sneaked
>>> into scsi/qemu-pr-h
On 20/10/2017 12:48, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 20 October 2017 at 11:12, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> GCC 4.9 and newer stopped warning for missing braces around the
>> "universal" C zero initializer {0}. One such initializer sneaked
>> into scsi/qemu-pr-helper.c and is breaking the build with such
>>
On 20 October 2017 at 11:12, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> GCC 4.9 and newer stopped warning for missing braces around the
> "universal" C zero initializer {0}. One such initializer sneaked
> into scsi/qemu-pr-helper.c and is breaking the build with such
> older GCC versions.
>
> Detect the lack of supp
On 10/20/17 12:37, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 20/10/2017 12:27, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>> +if compile_object "-Werror" "" ; then
>>> + :
>>> +else
>> Is this an established idiom for the configure script, in place of:
>>
>> if ! compile_object "-Werror" "" ; then
>>
>> ?
>>
>> Looks good to me othe
On 20/10/2017 12:27, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> +if compile_object "-Werror" "" ; then
>> + :
>> +else
> Is this an established idiom for the configure script, in place of:
>
> if ! compile_object "-Werror" "" ; then
>
> ?
>
> Looks good to me otherwise.
I tend not use "if !". In general that's
On 10/20/17 12:12, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> GCC 4.9 and newer stopped warning for missing braces around the
> "universal" C zero initializer {0}. One such initializer sneaked
s/sneaked/snuck/
Hmmm, no, wait, both forms are valid!
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/sneaked
https://en.wiktionary.org/wi
GCC 4.9 and newer stopped warning for missing braces around the
"universal" C zero initializer {0}. One such initializer sneaked
into scsi/qemu-pr-helper.c and is breaking the build with such
older GCC versions.
Detect the lack of support for the idiom, and disable the warning
in that case.
Sign
10 matches
Mail list logo
