On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 06:56:41PM +0300, Pauli Nieminen wrote: > @@ -124,6 +129,10 @@ AC_CACHE_CHECK([for supported warning flags], > libdrm_cv_warn_cflags, [ > AC_MSG_CHECKING([which warning flags were supported])]) > WARN_CFLAGS="$libdrm_cv_warn_cflags" > > +if test "x$STRICT_COMPILE" = xyes; then > + CFLAGS="$CFLAGS $WARN_CFLAGS -std=c99 -Werror"
I think instead you should use AC_PROG_CC_C99. I believe that this should always be used or -pendantic generates a number of spurious warnings. Does anyone object to force-enabling C99? There is at least one place in inteldrm where a C99 extension (variadic macros) is actually used.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
