http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51388
--- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> 2011-12-02 16:09:57 UTC --- On Fri, 2 Dec 2011, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > Still the behavior of warning for -Wno- changed appearantly. Joseph? The idea was that if an unknown -Wno- option is passed, but there were no warnings, it doesn't matter that we don't know what warnings the -Wno- option might have been intended to disable because there were no warnings at all for it to disable - so diagnosis of unknown -Wno- options is deferred and they are only diagnosed if some other warning (that the unknown option might potentially have been intended to disable) is given.
