Re: [xml] Autotools stuff in libxml2

[Mike Hommey <mh glandium org>]

On Thursday 09 October 2003 16:21, William M. Brack wrote:
> I am also a strong supporter of going with the latest and greatest,
> but Aleksey's point is a good one.  Of course, there must be some
> limits to how long the library must cater for older versions of the
> auto* routines.  At the moment, I believe we are trying to at least
> maintain compatibility with autoconf-2.13 and automake-1.4.
>
> Mike, could you save me a little time and let me know which of your
> requested changes would maintain compatibility within that
> constraint?

I'll come back to you when I'll have time to take a look into it.

> Also, with regard to your "P.S.", I don't get any such warnings on
> my system (x86 gentoo, gcc-3.2.3), but I seem to remember seeing
> some on either the Alpha or the HP, because of the way some
> validation macros check for unicode even though the argument is an
> unsigned char.  Which library version are you referring to, which
> compiler, and which architecture?  Also, what compiler flags are you
> using (when testing I'm using -g -O -pedantic -W -Wunused -Wimplicit
> -Wreturn-type -Wswitch -Wcomment -Wtrigraphs -Wformat
> -Wchar-subscripts -Wuninitialized -Wparentheses -Wshadow
> -Wpointer-arith -Wcast-align -Wwrite-strings -Waggregate-return
> -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wnested-externs -Winline
> -Wredundant-decls)?

-g -O2 -Wall, and I get these warnings on all architectures, including x86.

Regards,

Mike

-- 
"I have sampled every language, french is my favorite. Fantastic language,
especially to curse with. Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de
saloperie de connard d'enculé de ta mère. It's like wiping your ass
with silk! I love it." -- The Merovingian, in the Matrix Reloaded