Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484591 --- Comment #6 from Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-02-10 04:06:34 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > > Also the warnings are serious and need fixing, Ralf has already explained how > > (replace "%d" with "%zd"), let me know if there are other warnings which you > > need help fixing. > > - Would you explain why you "particularly" mention these warnings? > These warnings all comes from (f)printf with passing incorrect format, > however I have already seen in other review requests that > many warnings which seemed more and more critical than this > (like one related to implicit function declaration you mentioned > before) were just ignored. > Of course I admit that fixing these warnings are desirable, however > I am against making these warning the "blocker" for this review > request. > If you surely think these warnings are blockers, would you propose > fedora-packaging-list about what warnings should be treated as > review blockers? > It is really appreciated because I had repeatedly been asked > "is it a blocker??" As Ralf has demonstrated these warnings are usually a real issue, which only shows on 64 bit systems. But usually these are in debug printf's and thus quite often people don't care about fixing them. I agree this is not something which we normally block reviews on. So I wont do that in this case either. Still this something which really should be fixed, so consider this a should fix item. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review