On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 01:14:43AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Jeff King wrote: > > On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 12:45:30AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > > > Jeff King wrote: > > > > On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 01:12:53AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > > > > > > > So it looks like gcc is smarter now, and in trying to fix a few warnings > > > > > we generated hundreds more. > > > > > > > > > > This reverts commit e208f9cc7574f5980faba498d0aa30b4defeb34f. > > > > > > > > And now we've gone the other way, and re-enabled the initial warnings. > > > > Can we come up with a solution that helps both cases? > > > > > > What initial warnings? As I explained already I don't get any warnings > > > with this patch series in gcc 4.9.0. > > > > The "few warnings" in your statement quoted above. > > > > You could try reading the commit message of the commit you are > > reverting, which explains it, but the short answer is: try compiling > > with -O3. > > Sigh. And I'm the one with the abrasive style of communication. I apologize if that seemed abrasive. I am slightly annoyed that you seemed to be reverting my commit without understanding (or dealing with) the problem that the original fixed. But I was _also_ trying to point you in the right direction by directing you to -O3. Do you see the problem now? And did you look at the follow-up patch I sent? -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html