Re: make distcheck in tinderbox [was Re: make check failures- gnome-vfs, e-d-s, at-spi]

On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 20:24 +0200, Ikke wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 13:41 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > > I think the advantages of adding make distcheck are bigger than the
> > > disadvantages.
> > > In the end, being able to do make a tinderbox with make distcheck
> > and
> > > CFLAGS+="-Wall -Werror -pedantic -ansi" would be so cool ;-)
> > > 
> > 
> > -Wall -ansi -pedantic -Werror is not going to fly. See e.g.
> > 
> >
> Then we got some work to do ;-)
> IMHO these CFLAGS force devs to write cleaner (and sometimes even more
> secure) code, which is a good thing :-)

You didn't even read that bug report, obviously!

But beyond that '-ansi -pedantic' have a really wrong meaning. They
mean, to both GCC and the compiler:

 Turn off all extensions beyond the C89 standard

GLib has a lot of intelligence to detect and use features and extensions
when available and to replace them when not available. GCC suddenly
claiming it doesn't know about extensions that it *does* know about
will, not surprisingly, cause things to break.

Sometimes you can hack around this, but it's generally just stupid to
waste time doing so.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]