Re: Setting -Werror in CFLAGS

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Setting -Werror in CFLAGS
Date: 2012-01-04 19:35:44
Message-ID: 4F04AA10.2070800@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 04.01.2012 20:44, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Robert Haas<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan<peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> Yes, I know that these only appeared in GCC 4.6+ and as such are a
>>>> relatively recent phenomenon, but there has been some effort to
>>>> eliminate them, and if I could get a non-hacked -Werror build I'd feel
>>>> happy enough about excluding them as already outlined.
>>
>>> I just do this:
>>> echo COPT=-Werror> src/Makefile.custom
>>> ...which seems to work reasonably well.
>>
>> I see no point in -Werror whatsoever. If you aren't examining the make
>> output for warnings, you're not following proper development practice
>> IMO.
>
> I find -Werror to be a convenient way to examine the output for
> warnings. Otherwise they scroll off the screen. Yeah, I could save
> the output to a file and grep it afterwards, but that seems less
> convenient. I'm clearly not the only one doing it this way, since
> src/backend/parser/gram.o manually sticks in -Wno-error...

I use "make -s".

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2012-01-04 19:59:28 Re: Setting -Werror in CFLAGS
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2012-01-04 19:34:08 Re: BUG #6379: SQL Function Causes Back-end Crash