Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
Ulf Lamping wrote: > Hi List! > > I would like to say a big THANK YOU to all the developers involved in > the "virtual warning fix" party of recent days! > > :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) > :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) > :-) :-) :-) > > > I'm very pleased to notice that my "call for a warning free" Wireshark > was heard and was being answered ;-) > > The buildbot is now "all green" again, even with the "treat warning as > error" setting in the buildbot makefiles. > > To quote myself: >> While I would take a look on the Win32 warnings, are the unix/linux >> developers willing to spend some time to remove warnings that don't >> appear on Win32 (or would this be a "Win32 only" show)? >> > I'm pleased to notice that this wasn't a "Win32 only" show! > > As I did expect, some of the warnings have been fixed in a pragmatical > way, e.g. disabled some warnings for the generated files by using a > #pragma warning. However, this is pretty much ok for me and much better > than what we had before. For most code files, a warning will emit an > error now, making it much more obvious to see :-) > > > So I guess we now have a much better base to prevent new warnings from > leak into the sources. > > Our mission continues ... > Thanks for rousing us into action. It had grated with me for a long time, but I didn't have your resolve, nor Sebastian's commitment. -- Regards, Graham Bloice ___ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
Ulf Lamping wrote: > I'm very pleased to notice that my "call for a warning free" Wireshark > was heard and was being answered ;-) > > The buildbot is now "all green" again, even with the "treat warning as > error" setting in the buildbot makefiles. > I guess I'm not quite up to speed with the state of this project... Am I right in thinking that warnings have only been purged successfully so far for the win32 build? I can't build on linux yet with --warnings-as-errors... Cheers Rich ___ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 03:11:38PM +0100, Richard van der Hoff wrote: > I guess I'm not quite up to speed with the state of this project... Am > I right in thinking that warnings have only been purged successfully > so far for the win32 build? I can't build on linux yet with > --warnings-as-errors... I can build on FreeBSD/gcc 4.2 using --with-warnings-as-errors without problems. However, on my Linux/gcc 4.1 box, there are a few warnings left that we need to get rid of (I'll try to work on it today). Then we'll be able to run the Unix/OS X buildbots with --with-warnings-as-errors like the Windows build. The Windows build actually defaults to making warnings errors already, but I'm hesistant to do it yet on the Unix builds until we iron out warnings on all the platforms/gcc versions. Non-gcc builds are never given -Werror by the way. On Unix, most directories are built with -Werror when using the configure option --with-warnings-as-errors except epan/dissectors, which has a few thousand warnings from the ASN1 auto-generated dissectors that we still need to clear up. After fixing the Linux/gcc In summary, We're almost there on Unix.. :) Steve ___ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
Stephen Fisher wrote: > On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 03:11:38PM +0100, Richard van der Hoff wrote: > >> I guess I'm not quite up to speed with the state of this project... Am >> I right in thinking that warnings have only been purged successfully >> so far for the win32 build? I can't build on linux yet with >> --warnings-as-errors... > > I can build on FreeBSD/gcc 4.2 using --with-warnings-as-errors without > problems. However, on my Linux/gcc 4.1 box, there are a few warnings > left that we need to get rid of (I'll try to work on it today). Then > we'll be able to run the Unix/OS X buildbots with > --with-warnings-as-errors like the Windows build. I still have quite a few with 3.3. What does the buildbot use? > The Windows build actually defaults to making warnings errors already, > but I'm hesistant to do it yet on the Unix builds until we iron out > warnings on all the platforms/gcc versions. Agreed. > In summary, We're almost there on Unix.. :) :) I'll see what I can do to squash a few. Cheers Richard ___ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
Richard van der Hoff wrote: > Stephen Fisher wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 03:11:38PM +0100, Richard van der Hoff wrote: >> >>> I guess I'm not quite up to speed with the state of this project... Am >>> I right in thinking that warnings have only been purged successfully >>> so far for the win32 build? I can't build on linux yet with >>> --warnings-as-errors... >> I can build on FreeBSD/gcc 4.2 using --with-warnings-as-errors without >> problems. However, on my Linux/gcc 4.1 box, there are a few warnings >> left that we need to get rid of (I'll try to work on it today). Then >> we'll be able to run the Unix/OS X buildbots with >> --with-warnings-as-errors like the Windows build. > > I still have quite a few with 3.3. What does the buildbot use? It depends on the builder: Ubuntu: gcc version 4.1.2 20060928 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.1-13ubuntu5) OS X: gcc version 3.3 20030304 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 1666) Solaris: gcc version 4.0.2 ___ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 10:57:11AM -0700, Gerald Combs wrote: > It depends on the builder: > > Ubuntu: gcc version 4.1.2 20060928 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.1-13ubuntu5) > OS X: gcc version 3.3 20030304 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 1666) > Solaris: gcc version 4.0.2 btw: could buildbot send mails to wireshark-dev again in case of failed builds? Most of the time I don't check the buildbot after checking in changes. Just like I'm not a forum user, I'm not a check-check-buildbot-that-everything-is-fine user. I want to be notified when something is wrong. Polling is no longer used in the unix/windows world either. ciao Joerg -- Joerg Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology. ___ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
Richard van der Hoff wrote:
> I'll see what I can do to squash a few.
I'm just wondering what to do about this one:
scanner.c:1571: warning: `yyunput' defined but not used
(for epan/dfilter/scanner.{c,l}, flex 2.5.33, gcc 3.3.6)
Ideally we'd add --nounput to the flex cmdline or "%option nounput" to
scanner.l, but they are both flex-only, so that's a bit hard.
The best I can come up with otherwise is
"static void yyunput (int, char*) _U_;"
in the declarations. Thoughts?
Cheers,
Rich
___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 07:26:18PM +0100, Richard van der Hoff wrote:
> Richard van der Hoff wrote:
> > I'll see what I can do to squash a few.
>
> I'm just wondering what to do about this one:
>
> scanner.c:1571: warning: `yyunput' defined but not used
>
> (for epan/dfilter/scanner.{c,l}, flex 2.5.33, gcc 3.3.6)
>
> Ideally we'd add --nounput to the flex cmdline or "%option nounput" to
> scanner.l, but they are both flex-only, so that's a bit hard.
What happens when non-flex lexes encounter that statement?
ciao
Joerg
--
Joerg Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
I do not think other lex than flex would actually work with all our lexers.
As far as the generated dissectors are delivered in the src tarballs
there's no problem, as the source will compile anyway on any POSIX
system. Windows builds require flex and a make clean.
On the other side if I remember well, if yyunput is not generated
other warnings come up.
You can try... and see what happens.
Worst case scenario: you'll just have to revert a commit.
Luis
On 4/3/07, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Richard van der Hoff wrote:
> > I'll see what I can do to squash a few.
>
> I'm just wondering what to do about this one:
>
> scanner.c:1571: warning: `yyunput' defined but not used
>
> (for epan/dfilter/scanner.{c,l}, flex 2.5.33, gcc 3.3.6)
>
> Ideally we'd add --nounput to the flex cmdline or "%option nounput" to
> scanner.l, but they are both flex-only, so that's a bit hard.
>
> The best I can come up with otherwise is
> "static void yyunput (int, char*) _U_;"
> in the declarations. Thoughts?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rich
> ___
> Wireshark-dev mailing list
> Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
>
--
This information is top security. When you have read it, destroy yourself.
-- Marshall McLuhan
___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
Right, it's done...
Luis Ontanon wrote:
> I do not think other lex than flex would actually work with all our lexers.
>
> As far as the generated dissectors are delivered in the src tarballs
> there's no problem, as the source will compile anyway on any POSIX
> system. Windows builds require flex and a make clean.
>
> On the other side if I remember well, if yyunput is not generated
> other warnings come up.
>
> You can try... and see what happens.
> Worst case scenario: you'll just have to revert a commit.
>
> Luis
>
> On 4/3/07, Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Richard van der Hoff wrote:
>>> I'll see what I can do to squash a few.
>> I'm just wondering what to do about this one:
>>
>> scanner.c:1571: warning: `yyunput' defined but not used
>>
>> (for epan/dfilter/scanner.{c,l}, flex 2.5.33, gcc 3.3.6)
>>
>> Ideally we'd add --nounput to the flex cmdline or "%option nounput" to
>> scanner.l, but they are both flex-only, so that's a bit hard.
>>
>> The best I can come up with otherwise is
>> "static void yyunput (int, char*) _U_;"
>> in the declarations. Thoughts?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Rich
>> ___
>> Wireshark-dev mailing list
>> Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
>> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
>>
>
>
--
Richard van der Hoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Telephony Gateways Project Manager
Tel: +44 (0) 845 666 7778
http://www.mxtelecom.com
___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
On 4/3/07, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I do not think other lex than flex would actually work with all our lexers.
Few minutes later, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Now I'm sure they won't:
from http://www.gnu.org/software/flex/manual/html_chapter/flex_20.html
The following flex features are not included in lex or the POSIX specification:
C++ scanners
%option <=== THIS
start condition scopes
start condition stacks < THIS
interactive/non-interactive scanners
yy_scan_string() and friends < THIS
yyterminate() < THIS
yy_set_interactive()
yy_set_bol()
YY_AT_BOL()
<> < THIS
<*>
YY_DECL
YY_START
YY_USER_ACTION
YY_USER_INIT
#line directives
%{}'s around actions
multiple actions on a line
--
This information is top security. When you have read it, destroy yourself.
-- Marshall McLuhan
___
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
Luis Ontanon wrote: > On 4/3/07, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I do not think other lex than flex would actually work with all our lexers. > > Few minutes later, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Now I'm sure they won't: Excellent. Wireshark trunk now seems to build cleanly with --with-warnings-as-errors on gcc-3.3, fwiw. ___ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
Re: [Wireshark-dev] The "war against warnings" - mission accomplished!
Richard van der Hoff wrote: > Luis Ontanon wrote: >> On 4/3/07, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I do not think other lex than flex would actually work with all our lexers. >> Few minutes later, Luis Ontanon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> Now I'm sure they won't: > > Excellent. Wireshark trunk now seems to build cleanly with > --with-warnings-as-errors on gcc-3.3, fwiw. or it did, until your commit 50 minutes ago, Luis ... :'( ___ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
