Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 30 Jul 2002 07:11:01 +1000 (EST)
From:      Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
To:        "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, <cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org>, <cvs-all@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/fetch Makefile
Message-ID:  <20020730070249.W52778-100000@gamplex.bde.org>
In-Reply-To: <20020729154411.GA59991@dragon.nuxi.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, David O'Brien wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 12:17:43PM +0100, Mark Murray wrote:
> > > Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> > > >   Log:
> > > >   fetch(1) is WARNS-5 clean (tested on i386 and Alpha)
> > >
> > > Could someone please fix WARNS level 6 so it doesn't produce bogus C89
> > > compliance warnings?
> >
> > I've locally added -Wno-longlong to clean up a lot of that mess.
>
> We could add that.

This would just break the warning.

> The default for GCC is -std=gcc89, it will become
> -std=gcc99 once GCC grows fuller C99 support.  Or change to -std=c99.
> What do people perfer?

I prefer not breaking support for C90 in old applications until a few
years after we have a full C99 compiler and libraries.

Bruce


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020730070249.W52778-100000>