From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Tue Jun 19 19:57:53 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FD6F100B317 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 19:57:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pfg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from sonic303-4.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com (sonic303-4.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com [74.6.131.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC9A0736B2 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 19:57:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pfg@FreeBSD.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1529438271; bh=p2RpPN9Q+7jGxtP4DnStcDP9sMHt2HLG1YvGFXSlIXc=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=ioXCCT6H27c0ypeBu3yrEhJKqdiqqcV7a0IHpphrKpwREM/v0DXLQOHU8v5Zi6hGx2Aonyy6Q3ILfOvv4YFErGKzWXuKaIFqdgVujgM/I8Apk86jRcS3C5Vu16ho07WMII2BDb3foJdhhntJRlZke0sgojchKHJj+UWrkRIZ1F1/F3dNFAshgUJAxVZxjq7beExN7U36RnmxdIQReCvN89CRcOTTa8C5MkDeBdHGPHZGFujYDt7XtRAtUybiq0v9Gi7+jrrYsr+yXlIkZiwBY8GiUyzxKDAoz0HHaSFvp5fnOk8czQ2ZzzWX4h52LfsmqJ2ep4GGTBeKyJOOZWvPwA== X-YMail-OSG: UhA0w4wVM1nMPdHctBTWet0FDp9qRY2_fUPsNJSuaU7DTt1wz8XC6g.Ktf5c_zx LR9LIItT8x9fHmVFer_wYG3h9kIed8RNG5KBC4Rksjo1SlaoaYr6le0.GwBmnvhCO9VP4wLq4PUk qP49EFu1.PavAIyKFIJ_Ow.6PifKe5yrk0UVp2LV2lt_uyhIrD1DL_FcD0FvhrrtuZp3ZsuRrZim 0btD7_rKzbig.9eB89M6bFfMateHAOITfksjIGCedJyJjjBEiOSLtztiBseBtT.tEi6nW4TJNSlF 8YvF4N_V1icbYU58R8gEzUAVNf_7t4kXmc5NeiMPoscd9dy7foGet8YgrjkqIJC8vMn579QPdbpt h_7KMVbNOFVUO70yXYCVZId_YXOPWePeUbtD.wRGNTOpXBc6MPc03JOBxcZwqsnrs.FGohg5wRIJ EDUhM6Gw6tRjaNARR51Xm5Wy4vW09dK9pah0F.zSz_XTsct2ML1LeifrwHu9nourgVJjiQP4SX5g i1vkzpRSXHV.9p.Eev.Paq.UIIM8q5JlQmSPH.awNm7ZRe.F.kuc7JWn9tgAJup72Fg5G0C9eU2d Lmbw7KWb.q2qLAAqF6hgXVpR948eYVL4ld2lCawQbIilzanhInQG6f673p9qp.Mpg1EirK63En80 T_UdGaKOJOzD_rcyxcqu8Cw-- Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic303.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com with HTTP; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 19:57:51 +0000 Received: from 181.52.72.201 (EHLO [192.168.0.6]) ([181.52.72.201]) by smtp428.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (Oath Hermes SMTP Server) with ESMTPA ID 8d1d037a6289f9f7f3aae06c471cdccf; Tue, 19 Jun 2018 19:57:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: svn commit: r335278 - head/bin/pwd To: John Baldwin , Eitan Adler Cc: src-committers , svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org References: <201806170514.w5H5Epts050842@repo.freebsd.org> <77224f10-7633-1122-8099-466f2a35942f@FreeBSD.org> <4ad7ef96-e623-5ab8-dc47-c3178115ff24@FreeBSD.org> From: Pedro Giffuni Organization: FreeBSD Project Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 14:57:48 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4ad7ef96-e623-5ab8-dc47-c3178115ff24@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 19:57:53 -0000 On 19/06/2018 11:25, John Baldwin wrote: > On 6/18/18 10:26 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: >> On 18 June 2018 at 10:57, John Baldwin wrote: >>> On 6/16/18 10:14 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: >>>> Author: eadler >>>> Date: Sun Jun 17 05:14:50 2018 >>>> New Revision: 335278 >>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/335278 >>>> >>>> Log: >>>> pwd: mark usage as dead >>> You keep committing changes like this and ignoring e-mails about them. >> I replied both the first time and this time. I may have >> (accidentally?) ignored similar emails though. The question I have is >> other than the mild code churn what's the harm? > It adds clutter. Also, fixing the tool means you fix all the places at > once rather than slowly adding workarounds one by one. > >>> What broken compiler are you using that doesn't properly inherit __dead2 >>> from the call to exit()? >> In this case, scan-build50 was getting annoyed. > Does scan-build from LLVM 6.0 handle this correctly? If so, I'd say to > just mark this warning as broken (and thus ignore it) for scan-build50 > just as we ignore certain warnings from GCC 4.2.1 because they are > broken-as-implemented. > FWIW, clang's scan-build is made to even more false positives and general noise than the regular compiler warnings. It is better to just ignore it unless it finds something real. Pedro.