Some stuff for 0.159+

Mark Wielaard mjw at redhat.com
Thu Jan 23 13:32:29 UTC 2014


On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 10:33 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 January 2014 10:16:34 Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >   https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037051
> >   elfutils FTBFS if "-Werror=format-security" flag is used
> >   Currently we just remove that flag, but if we can rewrite the code to
> >   enable it by default for all files that would be nice. Dunno if that
> >   is really possible in all cases though.
> 
> i'd argue that this is good justification for my --disable-werror patch.  there 
> are plenty of compiler versions & flags that people can enable on platforms 
> that'll trigger warnings elfutils doesn't expect.  users are left in the 
> crappy scenario of either they don't get to build anything at all, or they 
> have to manually edit the Makefiles to delete the -Werror flag.  i don't really 
> understand the desire to force -Werror on everyone all the time.
> 
> then bugs like this turn into a wish list item rather than FTB and can be 
> evaluated as such.  using crazy flags ?  then pass in --disable-werror and we 
> don't care.  using reasonable flags ?  then we'll look at fixing your report, 
> but you can work around it in the mean time with --disable-werror.

I do see your point, although I am unsure how to distinguish "crazy"
from "non-crazy" compile flags. Also if people really insist on using
crazy compile flags can't they just also add -Wno-error to CLFAGS
themselves?

I do like to fix any non-crazy issues though. I just posted a patch to
handle -Wformat=2 (which includes -Wformat-security) by default for all
files now to solve the above bug. It is not the prettiest solution, but
not terribly ugly either (nothing we didn't do before in other places,
but we will see if someone yells and screams about the change).

Do you have any other examples (or just crazy examples to know what
people out there really do)?

Thanks,

Mark



More information about the elfutils-devel mailing list