svn commit: r223854 - head/lib/libstand

[Doug Barton]

On 07/08/2011 15:29, Warner Losh wrote:
> 
> On Jul 8, 2011, at 2:25 AM, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> While not ideal, would it be possible consider setting WARNS to set
>> different levels
>> depending on what the value of ${MACHINE_ARCH} is?
>>
>> Something like:
>>
>> .if ${MACHINE_ARCH} != "sparc64"  (or whatever the correct value is)
>> WARNS ?= 0
>> .else
>> WARNS ?= 2
>> .endif
>>
>> This would at least be an attempt to prevent people from adding new
>> code to libstand which introduce new warnings.
> 
> We've avoided this in the tree, and I'd urge against it.  It gives a
> false sense of security and tends to make problems linger.  I'd like to
> strongly argue against it.

If I'm missing something here, feel free to correct me. But what you
seem to be saying is that WARNS should be kept down to the LCD, is that
right? If so, wouldn't that mean that the problems are just going to be
ignored perpetually?

ISTM that what Craig is proposing gives us the benefits of noticing
breakage faster at higher WARNS levels for those arches that support
them, while allowing interested folks to pick up the work on the
less-well-supported arches as time allows. I don't see a downside to that.


Doug

-- 

	Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
			-- OK Go

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/