On Thu 6.Nov'08 at 12:30:19 -0800, John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > Carlos R. Mafra wrote: > > John H. Robinson, IV wrote: > > > # HG changeset patch > > > # User Dan Pascu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > # Date 1124755099 25200 > > > # Branch wm_0_92 > > > # Node ID 345324c47d750b7f1847e926c50f8e044eb4a24f > > > # Parent 6f8b21fc008fe3618a793761b2a9191bb433140f > > > > > > > eliminated gcc-4 compilation warnings > > > > Ok, so I have a problem with commit logs like this! :-) > > It was written by Dan when he commited it to the old CVS tre. I pulled > it straight from there. > > > IMHO a commit which fixes compilation warnings should > > explicitly mention what those warnings are in the first > > place. That way people trying to review it know what > > the intentions were from the start. > > > > I say this because I got curious about how to fix compilation > > warnings in general and wanted to learn from other people fixes, > > especially the ones which are highly experienced like Dan. > > > > Ok, so not knowing what the warnings were I simply reverted > > this commit in my git tree and compiled it again (using > > gcc 4.2.3 in 64-bit cpu). For my surprise only one warning > > was added this way (of course it may add more warnings with > > other gcc versions and/or 32-bit/64-bit) > > > > startup.c: In function 'StartUp': > > startup.c:613: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in > > function 'memset' > > > > which is fixed by this particular change here > > > > > --- a/src/startup.c Mon Aug 22 12:07:57 2005 -0700 > > > +++ b/src/startup.c Mon Aug 22 16:58:19 2005 -0700 > > > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ > > > #include <stdio.h> > > > #include <stdlib.h> > > > #include <unistd.h> > > > +#include <string.h> > > > #include <errno.h> > > > #include <signal.h> > > > #include <sys/wait.h> > > I'l look into getting the above patch applied.
Hm, I think I didn't express myself well. The patch must be ok, as it was Dan who wrote it. And you have already added it to the repo. I was just disappointed by the fact that I didn't see what those warnings he said he was fixing were. So I reverted his patch and compiled wmaker again expecting to see the warnings which were fixed by the patch, but only one such warning came up. The one in startup.c:613, which is indeed fixed by that part of Dan's patch which I quoted. So in summary: You don't need to do anything :-) I was just curious about the warnings and thought it would be a good motivation to review his patch, but I couldn't reproduce the warnings here (which is not unexpected, as I have a different gcc, different cpu etc). -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
