On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 at 09:37, Olly Betts <o...@survex.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 09:23:26PM +1200, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: > > upstream just "fixed" this by disabling the warning, fwiw > > This bug was reported in setools but reassigned to swig - I think you > must mean "setools" by "upstream" there? >
Ah yes. Sorry for the lack of clarity. > I actually addressed this upstream in SWIG back in May (by fixing the > generated code rather than disabling the warning), but there's not > been a release in a while. I'll take a look and see if the fix can be > backported to the Debian package. The potential problem is that it was > after clean-up of support for older Python versions, and it seems > unhelpful in the wider context for the Debian swig package to generate > code which supports a narrower range of Python versions than the > corresponding upstream SWIG version. > Hm yes. On some level it would be fine to only support versions of Python supported by Debian, but on another that would be a bit hostile. > Ignoring the warning is reasonable. The code in question does invoke > undefined behaviour, but it should be safe in practice with the calling > conventions used on Linux. > I agree. > Compiling packages with -Werror seems unwise in general, but I really > wouldn't recommend compiling SWIG-generated code in packages with > -Werror. > Totally agree! It's fine to use it during development but using it in distributed source is just a timebomb. Cheers, mwh
