Re: Warning compiling pg_dump (MinGW, Windows XP)

From: Pavel Golub <pavel(at)microolap(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Pavel Golub <pavel(at)microolap(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Warning compiling pg_dump (MinGW, Windows XP)
Date: 2011-01-18 09:40:26
Message-ID: 462853531.20110118114026@gf.microolap.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hello, Andrew.

You wrote:

AD> On 01/17/2011 03:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>>> On 01/17/2011 07:18 AM, Pavel Golub wrote:
>>>> So you think I should just ignore these warnings? Because I can't
>>>> remember the same behaviour on 8.x branches...
>>> We've had them all along, as I said. See
>>> <http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=frogmouth&dt=2011-01-04%2023%3A54%3A16&stg=make>
>>> for the same thing in an 8.2 build.
>> I wonder why mingw's gcc is complaining about %m when other versions of
>> gcc do not? If you can't get it to shut up about that, there's not
>> going to be much percentage in silencing warnings about %lld.
>>
>>

AD> We could add -Wno-format to the flags. That makes it shut up, but maybe
AD> we don't want to use such a sledgehammer.

I want to understand the only thing. Are these warnings really
dangerous? Or I should just ignore them?

AD> cheers

AD> andrew

--
With best wishes,
Pavel mailto:pavel(at)gf(dot)microolap(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dimitri Fontaine 2011-01-18 09:42:16 Re: REVIEW: Extensions support for pg_dump
Previous Message Pavel Golub 2011-01-18 09:37:55 Re: Warning compiling pg_dump (MinGW, Windows XP)