From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/7774 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] When building, don't use compiler flags which cause warnings Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 15:36:11 -0400 Message-ID: <20150526193611.GH17573@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20150526181830.GD17573@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1432665405-26308-1-git-send-email-alexinbeijing@gmail.com> <20150526184723.GE17573@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <5564C197.6020404@gmail.com> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1432668986 12136 80.91.229.3 (26 May 2015 19:36:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 19:36:26 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-7786-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Tue May 26 21:36:26 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YxKeI-00061w-2g for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 21:36:26 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 30130 invoked by uid 550); 26 May 2015 19:36:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 30108 invoked from network); 26 May 2015 19:36:24 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5564C197.6020404@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:7774 Archived-At: On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 08:55:19PM +0200, Alex Dowad wrote: > > > On 26/05/15 20:47, Rich Felker wrote: > >On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 08:36:45PM +0200, Alex Dowad wrote: > >>This silences some warnings when building with clang. > >>--- > >>Dear Rich Felker, > >> > >>This accomplishes the same thing as the previous patch by "promoting" all > >>warnings to errors. Look better? > >No, it has exactly the same problem -- it treats any spurious warnings > >which the chosen $CC might produce as a failure of the test. > OK, understood. It doesn't look like there is any way to treat > ignored options as errors, > unfortunately. Which flags are giving the warnings? I see both clang and cparser have a -Wunknown-warning-option which gives warnings for unknown warning options. I believe it's on by default, and could be turned off, but using -Werrror=unknown-warning-option seems like the best thing to do (so they get rejected). I don't see a way to disable warnings for other unrecognized options, though. Rich