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] [xen-4.0-testing test] 7147: regressions - FAIL

To: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.0-testing test] 7147: regressions - FAIL
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:49:31 +0100
Cc: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Olaf Hering <olaf@xxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 23 May 2011 08:50:13 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:sender:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:cc :message-id:thread-topic:thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Zu9pHA+LDEbsR/Notr4hfCM63/A7KdaKxQ9SD6LRwmk=; b=xSL4RqWirw/s/wZnF3KjjiDYOBzF+c2unqc27U06y9/JILAMQYQH8BUqxCLN9BYDxi zg196EsMboxU3Bbwfb3mvMdV0Jsa2x7JIPl4udMyxLdYddIQNnT9uYyzn5iBLhM1f0d3 n6znuVCiHAFt63fBHtJZfPYABkHnWTjnkAES0=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:thread-topic :thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=NVMJJEfzoRbMkq1SQveBY1HfEssPphpbnHoD72/7VRS/3c59zWV9pX7wwG8Ld62Jj3 PV5UuOxclkqfiGf4pZqrZn0qkJFEraJ7zEGQ+PiyQHPRj8z6WDGmqg4GGGqoq4AIn5ee WNlHW6PgYLFtvdkOzKVJZQ8cLARftJ55e71Ok=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <19930.32778.342171.90825@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcwZYQE5Am5T+VDkLUm6IuNqCfedSQ==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.0-testing test] 7147: regressions - FAIL
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
On 23/05/2011 16:40, "Ian Jackson" <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Keir Fraser writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.0-testing test] 7147: regressions
> - FAIL"):
>> Here's a nice short one that seems to work for me. It does rely on the
>> compiler emitting the word 'unrecognized' iff the option under test is
>> unrecognised. I strongly suspect this is a safe bet.
> Sadly, some mad people run with LC_MESSAGES set to something other
> than C which produces native-language error messages even from gcc.

Well LC_ALL=C is easy to add.

>> Unfortunately I can't
>> see any way around grepping the output, since otherwise we can't distinguish
>> the integer-assignment-to-pointer warning from the unrecognised-option
>> warning.
> We don't need to distinguish them.  We just need to know whether
> passing the option works or not.  That's what my patch does.

Ahhh... Is this because of a emitted-as-an-error-not-a-warning bug in Debian
gcc, on top of the more general lazily-detected-unrecognised-Wno-option

Well, tbh I'd rather get rid of unsupported -Wno- options in general, not
just where they are erroneously emitted as errors. Otherwise it will confuse
everyone that each time they get a compile warning they also get extra bogus
unrecognised option messages. That would be pretty crappy.

 -- Keir

> Ian.

Xen-devel mailing list