Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 10:55:13 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: "Andrew W. Nosenko" <andrew.w.nosenko@gmail.com> Cc: David DEMELIER <demelier.david@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Ports <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: OPTIONS Message-ID: <20101006175513.GB81751@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=nH9xMMiiAV2y8YP=KH8-SRF1COXnUSkZUUvMc@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTik%2B1rvY4ZYgzHRjaX8PBfD1UqNCNeadHqg3KBfo@mail.gmail.com> <20100918223933.GB85995@dragon.NUXI.org> <AANLkTi=vPKpaPL9L=pQN9EdWdEN3sf1pos6uGtJU7ybV@mail.gmail.com> <20101002002605.GA8018@dragon.NUXI.org> <AANLkTinkasFFQ8ssbTSdbYUS%2BJ-tYMc1U3w9rkUCk9Gd@mail.gmail.com> <4CA844E5.7060303@infracaninophile.co.uk> <AANLkTimLqUaZMyDs-mhc-cQbASU%2B_1XqRjd=2=N%2BVSsR@mail.gmail.com> <20101005183452.GF7829@dragon.NUXI.org> <20101006084040.GA53569@dragon.NUXI.org> <AANLkTi=nH9xMMiiAV2y8YP=KH8-SRF1COXnUSkZUUvMc@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 12:01:48PM +0300, Andrew W. Nosenko wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:40, David O'Brien <obrien@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 11:34:52AM -0700, David O'Brien (@FreeBSD) wrote:
> >> > 2010/10/3 Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk>:
> >> > > In fact, you might just as well write a small HTML form, display it
> >> > > using lynx or w3c or some other text mode browser[*], and then have the
> >> > > form action feed into a CGI program that outputs a small Makefile with
> >> > > appropriate variable definitions in it.
> >>
> >> I like this statement -- as it shows just how complex this will get when
> >> taken to its natural conclusion.
> >
> > This is also how ridiculous things can get:
> >
> > curl 7.21.1 now offers me:
> > [X] WERROR Treat compilation warnings as errors
> >
> > Can the port maintainer really not decide if that should just be
> > turned off or turned on for FreeBSD?!?
>
> I wonder why -Werror even ever considered to be turned "on" at all.
\AOL{me too}
I mean building with "-Werror" sounds like goodness -- of course I
want it.
But why is the maintainer offering me a choice?
What is the likelihood of the port not building with -Werror?
Does he know of versions of FreeBSD where the port will not build
with -Werror? Hum.. maybe I don't want -Werror. But then why didn't
the the maintainer just decide we would all not build with -Werror?
Given we are just building and installing Curl, what do we expect
users to do choose WERROR and get a build break with -Werror?
They aren't developing the next version of Curl. Can they submit a
FreeBSD PR and expect the maintainer will quickly add a patch to the
port to fix the warning(s)? Or will the response be
"Well, don't do that."? In which case just turning off -Werror for
all seems a better thing to do.
--
-- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
A: Why is top-posting (putting a reply at the top of the message) frowned upon?
Let's not play "Jeopardy-style quoting"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20101006175513.GB81751>