[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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

  • To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 09:39:27 +0100
  • Cc: Olaf Hering <olaf@xxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 20 May 2011 01:40:33 -0700
  • 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=Yax5yJiKGEbRr5k1LFIErOZqIPnNC7uUh6meVCBvmYYJLvR02ji9HEtiplyjTDHrls ftBnqBWsJX57mfcXSB8h7sKhc5sAZ3a2gVT+hXPuPKhVas1uTJBr+uE8jvIr8o8sKfV1 eErHoRfNTX5YcO0SMEVgQkihVwPYffUVVzw/I=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcwWyW2aV9dVBqeugU2xn8exyNy7BA==
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00 of 45] gcc 4.6 compile fixes for xen-unstable

On 20/05/2011 09:28, "Ian Campbell" <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>>  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).
> Perhaps we should do both -- take the fixes into unstable and disable
> the warning in 4.1?

We should just disable the warning. Job done, don't need to take the uglier

 -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.