This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00 of 45] gcc 4.6 compile fixes for xen-unstable

To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00 of 45] gcc 4.6 compile fixes for xen-unstable
From: Olaf Hering <olaf@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 09:44:06 +0200
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 20 May 2011 00:44:59 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1305877452; l=714; s=domk; d=aepfle.de; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Subject:Cc:To:From: Date:X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH; bh=m4cqNkmZDLv9FRnJxLZ9wGLs6mg=; b=oNAdbfw8UXL8oiS67Knl13KSDvb9rIdF7WJ9/N/U3GfOkuC39XnjUC3pQ/6j6b1azI/ Cbdq956EsoxDm0oZ494BhO+R6cyruAUXmWMhpBTP70XgG+iJ/UW2kni9dq5fbeecbMifV dpdDRJ8C6cerUfr6Nkwo6l314N0m1vCCAT0=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4DD6369302000078000425E2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <patchbomb.1305831919@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <4DD6369302000078000425E2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Fri, May 20, Jan Beulich wrote:

> >>> On 19.05.11 at 21:05, Olaf Hering <olaf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The following series fix compile errors with gcc 4.6.
> > Please review if each change is correct.
> Hmm, this large amount of changes makes we wonder whether we
> shouldn't simply turn of the unused-but-set-variable warning
> altogether, or at least not have it be an error. Not the least
> because I'm not sure it'd be nice to backport all of these changes
> into older trees (which obviously would suffer mostly the same
> problems when built with 4.6 or newer).

At least the 4.1 branch should receive the relevant changes for gcc 4.6.
I can send a similar series for that branch.


Xen-devel mailing list