Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 07:11:01 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, <cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org>, <cvs-all@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/fetch Makefile Message-ID: <20020730070249.W52778-100000@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20020729154411.GA59991@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, David O'Brien wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 12:17:43PM +0100, Mark Murray wrote: > > > Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@FreeBSD.org> writes: > > > > Log: > > > > fetch(1) is WARNS-5 clean (tested on i386 and Alpha) > > > > > > Could someone please fix WARNS level 6 so it doesn't produce bogus C89 > > > compliance warnings? > > > > I've locally added -Wno-longlong to clean up a lot of that mess. > > We could add that. This would just break the warning. > The default for GCC is -std=gcc89, it will become > -std=gcc99 once GCC grows fuller C99 support. Or change to -std=c99. > What do people perfer? I prefer not breaking support for C90 in old applications until a few years after we have a full C99 compiler and libraries. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020730070249.W52778-100000>