From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 7 22:59:29 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D9BB16A439 for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 22:59:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lulf@kerneled.org) Received: from cassarossa.samfundet.no (cassarossa.samfundet.no [129.241.93.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACBCD43D98 for ; Mon, 7 Nov 2005 22:59:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lulf@kerneled.org) Received: from lulf by cassarossa.samfundet.no with local (Exim 4.50) id 1EZFxR-0001rl-Ve for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Mon, 07 Nov 2005 23:59:22 +0100 Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 23:59:21 +0100 From: Ulf Lilleengen To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20051107225921.GA1623@samfundet.no> References: <20051101225848.GB20543@odin.ac.hmc.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051101225848.GB20543@odin.ac.hmc.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Subject: Re: Contributing to FreeBSD list of things todo X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2005 22:59:29 -0000 On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 02:58:48PM -0800, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 04:30:00PM -0600, Ben Siemon wrote: > > I have a suggestion for things dev people could do to help out with > > code already done. I noticed the suggestion for compiling with -Wall > > enabled. Would it serve any purpose to compile the sources with -ansi > > and or -pedantic as well? I am fairly new to FreeBSD so forgive me if > > this has alread been addressed. > > I think the todo list is dated in this area. We now compile many files > with large sets of warning flags via the WARNS variable in Makefiles. > It is useful to expand the coverage in this area, but it's not all that > trivial. It's often fairly easy to make the warning go away without > fixing the real problem the warning represented. This means that far > too many patches to raise warning levels are useless and waste developer > time. There's also the fact that such changes need to be tested on > multiple architectures because certain warnings are platform specfic. > At the least testing is needed on i386, alpha, and sparc. > I've seen an effort to remove these warnings by setting WARNS?=6 . Would this be preferable to work on, on freebsd as well? Ofcourse testing on most architectures. -- Ulf Lilleengen