From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 11 21:00:34 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB7CF106566B for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 21:00:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 438C48FC0C for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 21:00:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from porto.starpoint.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.100]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id AAA01905; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 00:00:23 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by porto.starpoint.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD)) id 1SeBip-0003qe-21; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 00:00:23 +0300 Message-ID: <4FD65C64.3080001@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 00:00:20 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120503 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Mikhail T." X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=X-VIET-VPS Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Ports Subject: graphics/libfpx: use of bsd.lib.mk and warnings X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 21:00:35 -0000 [Cc-ing mailing list just in case it is useful for other port maintainers] Mikhail, I see that graphics/libfpx uses a custom FreeBSD-specific makefile which makes use of bsd.lib.mk and sets WARNS to 3. I think that this is an unsustainable approach. First, the external libraries are not under our control and may adhere to some different policy with respect to warnings. Second, different compilers (gccXY, clang) may be used to compile ports and they may produce new warnings-come-errors. Right now, this is an issue for me with gcc46 as a ports compiler. I think that the best solution here is NO_WERROR. What do you and other port guys think about this? -- Andriy Gapon