From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Jan 24 16:11: 8 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from glitch.crosswinds.net (glitch.crosswinds.net [209.208.163.35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 667AC37B400 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 16:10:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from lexx.my.domain ([195.110.170.136]) by glitch.crosswinds.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA53766; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 19:10:41 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from john253@crosswinds.net) From: John Murphy To: groggy@iname.com Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kernel compile errs Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 00:11:25 +0000 Organization: not a lot.org Reply-To: john@T-F-I.freeserve.co.uk Message-ID: References: <200101242303.XAA71342@en26.groggy.anc.acsalaska.net> In-Reply-To: <200101242303.XAA71342@en26.groggy.anc.acsalaska.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG groggy@iname.com wrote: >> >FBSD 3.5.1 >> > >> >after about 5 years i have been used to FBSD compiling >> >without errors, so i assume i must have something wrong >> >in my kernel config, cuz i sure get alot of them now. >> >it is not bad memory or anything, cuz it's the same >> >errors everytime. can someone please point out >> >the error of my ways? >> > >> >please ditto a copy of any replies off the list. >> > >> >thanks. >>=20 >> I searched the rest of your message but couldn't find "error". >> I see lots of warnings, and I often get similar, but I don't >> think we need worry as long as the end result Works. >>=20 >> John. > >thanks :) i meant "error" as in that it used to be frowned upon to have >warnings in kernel compiles. i understand they are warnings - however - >FBSD developers used to take some pride in having clean code that didn't >produce warnings - and i never had any pre 3.0-series. it isn't = comforting >to see 10's of variables throughout the kernel being initialized by >incompatable pointer types, variables in functions that are unused, >variables that are uninitialized, etc. that is kinda sloppy, no? :) for >developers claiming to uphold the highest standards in coding? Interesting. My first experience with FreeBSD was with 3.0-Release, so I've always seen them. Perhaps they were switched off by default on 2.x. I'm glad you put that smiley near the "sloppy" word. High standard results are enough for me, thanks ;) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message