Peter Kadau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi !
>
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.3/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Warning%20Options
>
> Hmm, that's exactly as in the info page.
>
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.3/gcc/C---Dialect-Options.html#C++%20Dialect%20Options
>
> > and search f
Hi !
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.3/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Warning%20Options
Hmm, that's exactly as in the info page.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.3/gcc/C---Dialect-Options.html#C++%20Dialect%20Options
> and search for permissive, to see the condition Alexander speaks of.
W
Peter Kadau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi !
>
> > Then configure runs gcc with wrong parameters. In GCC 3.3 -pedantic implies
> > -pedantic-error, unless -fpermissive is specified too.
>
> ??? The info page doesn't say so.
> If one can't trust the GNU info pages - what a mess,
> considered th
Alexander Kabaev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > [snip]
> >
> > Curiosity: Why does this suppression get disabled in the imported compiler?
>
> I guess justification was to see warnings about FreeBSD's own header
> files. We dont want to hide warnings in them, we want to fix issues
> warnings rep
Hi !
> What kind of enlightenment are you looking for?
0.17 e.g. 8-))
Seriously, I didn't mean to piss off anyone.
Just wanted to learn about the *reason* of this incoherence.
I apologize if the irony was way too masked.
> gcc mailing list address is not secret, I suggest you to take it
> the
> ??? The info page doesn't say so.
> If one can't trust the GNU info pages - what a mess,
> considered that they refuse to maintain proper manpages either...
> Confused. Please enlighten me.
What kind of enlightenment are you looking for? gcc mailing list
address is not secret, I suggest you to t
On Friday 18 July 2003 21:16, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 07:07:55PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> Content-Description: signed data
>
> > On Friday 18 July 2003 18:14, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> > > Configure ailing due to warnings is a real bug.
> >
> > What do you mean n
Hi !
> Then configure runs gcc with wrong parameters. In GCC 3.3 -pedantic implies
> -pedantic-error, unless -fpermissive is specified too.
??? The info page doesn't say so.
If one can't trust the GNU info pages - what a mess,
considered that they refuse to maintain proper manpages either...
Con
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 07:07:55PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
Content-Description: signed data
> On Friday 18 July 2003 18:14, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
>
> > Configure ailing due to warnings is a real bug.
>
> What do you mean now? Configure is not failing because of warnings, it is
> failing
> [snip]
>
> Curiosity: Why does this suppression get disabled in the imported compiler?
I guess justification was to see warnings about FreeBSD's own header
files. We dont want to hide warnings in them, we want to fix issues
warnings report. C++ headers just a side effect of that decision.
--
Al
"Jacques A. Vidrine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [For some reason I haven't seen Alexander's post yet, so I'm mixing
> replies here.]
>
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 06:12:10PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> > On Friday 18 July 2003 17:37, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> > > On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:3
On Friday 18 July 2003 19:23, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
> Even when libstdc++ is updated, we'll still be left with warnings from
> C-derived headers, such as the `long long' stuff.
Warnings are perfectly fine with me, since they don't break anything. Putting
bandaid around ports to avoid _error
[For some reason I haven't seen Alexander's post yet, so I'm mixing
replies here.]
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 06:12:10PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> On Friday 18 July 2003 17:37, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:33:58 -0500
> >
> > "Jacques A. Vidrine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
On Friday 18 July 2003 18:14, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> Configure ailing due to warnings is a real bug.
What do you mean now? Configure is not failing because of warnings, it is
failing because of _ERRORS_, errors occur in gcc's libstdc++ bits. They _used
to be warnings_ before the import.
--
On Friday 18 July 2003 17:37, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:33:58 -0500
>
> "Jacques A. Vidrine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I also recall lots of missing `typename's in the system headers that
> > were resolved in the actual GCC distribution.
> >
> > Alexander, do the STL hea
[cc: list trimmed]
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 10:32:51AM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> I've tried to come up with a less obscure testcase:
>
> #include
> #include
> using namespace std;
>
> int main ()
> {
>
> string astring="Hello World";
> cout << astring << endl;
> }
>
> Now, if I c
Michael Nottebrock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There was one report of kdelibs' configure failing because of "the weirdness
> of the new cc (3.3), that leads to errors instead of warnings with certain
> combinations of -W* and -pedantic options."
gcc 3.3 is a lot stricter about some errors whi
On Friday 18 July 2003 10:32, I wrote:
> Now, if I compile this on 5.1-RELEASE with
>
> c++ -Wnon-virtual-dtor -Wno-long-long -Wall -pedantic -W -Wpointer-arith
> -Wmissing-prototypes -Wwrite-strings -DNDEBUG -DNO_DEBUG -O -pipe
> -mcpu=pentiumpro -fno-check-new -L/usr/local/lib -I/usr/local/inclu
On Thursday 17 July 2003 22:50, Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> Here is how to reproduce the problem, Michael is talking about. Simply
> try to build the kdelibs3 (or kdegraphic3, or kdenetwork3) port.
I've tried to come up with a less obscure testcase:
#include
#include
using namespace std;
int mai
On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:09:05PM +0200, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
Content-Description: signed data
> On Wednesday 16 July 2003 17:07, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> > s/gcc-3.3/ports/ issues and we are in agreement.
> >
> > Patches to fix broken ports are welcome. Kris is doing a fine job
> > generati
On 17 Jul 2003 22:47:02 +0200, Peter Kadau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi !
Sorry for that...
That was my pre-get-rid-of-g++-workaround - how embarrassing !
Alexander pointed out in private (thank you),
that this was a failure.
I am willing to test the patches if one of you have any.
Try that ins
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 22:18:38 +0200
Michael Nottebrock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
=> On Thursday 17 July 2003 22:11, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
=>
=> > -Werror? As doctor said: if it hurts, DON'T DO THAT.
=>
=> In the kdelibs case, it's definitely _not_ -Werror
=Whatever it is, I haven't seen one
Hi !
Sorry for that...
That was my pre-get-rid-of-g++-workaround -
how embarrassing !
Alexander pointed out in private (thank you),
that this was a failure.
> I am willing to test the patches if one of you have any.
Try that instead:
--- prog/checker_string.hpp.origTue Sep 24 03:34:52
On 17 Jul 2003 22:07:37 +0200, Peter Kadau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi !
> s/gcc-3.3/ports/ issues and we are in agreement.
alright, `port compile issues raised with the adoption of gcc-3.3'
> Patches to fix broken ports are welcome.
Looking at AbiWord2 I suspect this has to be pushed
upstream
On Thursday 17 July 2003 22:11, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> -Werror? As doctor said: if it hurts, DON'T DO THAT.
In the kdelibs case, it's definitely _not_ -Werror (I wouldn't complain about
that, obviously). Mikhail, can you recap which combinations exactly trigger
what?
--
Michael Nottebrock
Hi !
> > s/gcc-3.3/ports/ issues and we are in agreement.
alright, `port compile issues raised with the adoption of gcc-3.3'
> > Patches to fix broken ports are welcome.
Looking at AbiWord2 I suspect this has to be pushed
upstream in some cases.
OK, here is a - ahem - patch for aspell:
--- prog/ch
On Wednesday 16 July 2003 17:07, Alexander Kabaev wrote:
> s/gcc-3.3/ports/ issues and we are in agreement.
>
> Patches to fix broken ports are welcome. Kris is doing a fine job
> generating a list of what needs to be fixed with his cluster packabe
> building runs.
There was one report of kdelibs'
s/gcc-3.3/ports/ issues and we are in agreement.
Patches to fix broken ports are welcome. Kris is doing a fine job
generating a list of what needs to be fixed with his cluster packabe
building runs.
--
Alexander Kabaev
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing lis
Hi !
Some port builds bail out with errors.
(Of course they do, that was expected.)
This is definitely gcc-3.3 related.
(They did build on 5.1-Release and
do build on 4.8-Stable.)
Would it be of interest for anyone to post them
or is it way too early for that ?
('Wait until 5.2-Release is out ?
29 matches
Mail list logo
