From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jul 20 04:57:33 2003
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6B4E737B404; Sun, 20 Jul 2003 04:57:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B434A43FAF; Sun, 20 Jul 2003 04:57:30 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from gamplex.bde.org (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246])
	by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3p2/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA22351;
	Sun, 20 Jul 2003 21:57:27 +1000
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 21:57:26 +1000 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@gamplex.bde.org
To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <200307201024.h6KAO9tk009943@repoman.freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20030720213903.J595@gamplex.bde.org>
References: <200307201024.h6KAO9tk009943@repoman.freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/bin/ed Makefile re.c
X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree <cvs-src.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-src@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 11:57:34 -0000

On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:

> ru          2003/07/20 03:24:09 PDT
>
>   FreeBSD src repository
>
>   Modified files:
>     bin/ed               Makefile re.c
>   Log:
>   Make this code WARNS=6 clean again (after GCC 3.1.1 import).

gcc-3.3?

The bug is in gcc-3.3, so it shouldn't be fixed here.  `expr' may
be a better variable name than `exp' for a variable related to
expressions, but this is just a minor style issue.

pwd/pwd.c has regressed similarly (except 'lg' is a worse variable
name than `log' for a variable related to "logical").

I think we mostly avoided mangling variables named `sin' but there
are some of these to demangle too.

Bruce