On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 1:34 PM Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn <chith...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > Jason Zaman schrieb: > >> No. With -Werror, upstream indicates that if a warning occurs, the build > >> should fail and the resulting code not be installed on user systems. > >> > >> Instead, someone knowledgeable should look at the situation *first* and > >> determine whether it is a bogus warning, a trivial issue, or something > >> which > >> warrants further attention. > >> > >> I have long disagreed with QA policy on this, and think that ebuilds should > >> respect upstream here. Of course giving users the ability to override. > > > > I disagree. -Werror means that upstream wants it to build without > > warnings on their distro with their version of the compiler with their > > versions of all the libraries. > > It means, upstream wants it to build without warnings everywhere. And if a > warning occurs (due to change in compiler, libraries, architecture, etc.), > have a developer look at it first before installing the code on user systems.
This sounds good in theory, but I think it's pretty well established that in practice this isn't effective and instead is a large waste of time. In fact, the foundational premise that it's possible to build without warnings everywhere is simply wrong. Consider again the bug that started this. The maintainer had not built this configuration. None of the arch teams had built this configuration until I did for the last architecture Cc'd. The patch committed doesn't change anything installed on the system, if not for Werror preventing the code from building.
