Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 14:31:32 +0200 From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Dimitry Andric <dim@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Hiroki Sato <hrs@freebsd.org>, eadler@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r230354 - head/usr.sbin/makefs Message-ID: <20120123123132.GM31224@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <4F1D51A0.6040405@FreeBSD.org> References: <201201200138.q0K1cSou016739@svn.freebsd.org> <20120120.123256.1432718473132856309.hrs@allbsd.org> <CAF6rxg=VWzUcDuk_oN_wepJPejg8JnGBKm5oLXB7Y8JCW52t3w@mail.gmail.com> <20120123.132840.618925004528110765.hrs@allbsd.org> <4F1D51A0.6040405@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--wFtFFPDCaES44eZG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 01:25:04PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 2012-01-23 05:28, Hiroki Sato wrote: > ... > > I don't think it is needed. The makefs utility is a special case > > because it will probably diverge from the upstream to support > > FreeBSD-specific feature in the future (this is one of the reasons > > why it is not in contrib/). It didn't happen so far, however. > > > > By the way, does gcc46 no longer allow unused code? Generally > > speaking, I think it is enough to clean up unused code only when we > > actually change the code. >=20 > The warnings are not about unused code, but about variables which are > assigned, but then never referenced anymore. Sometimes this is just a > cosmetic issue, and the compiler will hopefully optimize out the > unreferenced variable(s). In other situations there are real bugs. >=20 > In any case, gcc 4.5 and 4.6 just enable more warnings by default, and > when using -Wall; in particular the "variable set but not used" one. >=20 > This warning should really be suppressed when WARNS is set to a low > level, such as with makefs (it has WARNS?=3D2). >=20 > Attached diff makes it so, for gcc45 and gcc46. It uses the same > approach as I added earlier for clang. It can also be easily extended > to other warnings. There is a typo in the second or condition, should it be gcc46 both times ? Anyway, the reason to answer this message is two ask the for seemingly unreasonable approach of matching compiler type/version based on the driver name. This completely precludes anybody from using gcc installed not from the ports tree. Could the tests performed based on the driver version information instead of name ? --wFtFFPDCaES44eZG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk8dUyMACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4iKqgCg8glXah5zu8+ZhSHWgj+FHMyG 6SwAnid/dyzGYZysvACwEKGVQ8D5x3hU =LDJn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --wFtFFPDCaES44eZG--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120123123132.GM31224>