On Thu, 8 Mar 2012, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >>> I noticed we return in this case, without initializing this variable. >>> Visual inspection indicates we do not seem to access the variable in >>> this error case, but a) better safe than sorry, and b) GCC 4.8 currently >>> warns about it. >> I generally don't think this patch makes things any better (or worse). >> If we return an error, the caller should not expect this value to be >> sane. What's the GCC 4.8 warning? > secmgr.c:230:1: warning: 'policy' may be used uninitialized in this > function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] > > An alternative to silence this would be initializing policy to some > default value. Would that be preferrable?
I did not see a response to this, but it seems Francois ran into the same in the meantime and addressed it similarly, so this can be closed: http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-cvs/2012-July/088865.html (http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2012-March/112089.html was my original submission.) Gerald