On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 11:51:01AM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: > Hey, > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 11:29:03AM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > [...] > > If gcc is already checking for this. Warning should be fine. > > > > Regarding -Werror, we would at least need to keep the autogenerated C > > code by bison away from it. > > In nftables there is libparser_la_CFLAGS which holds quite some > exclusions already and could be used to pass -Wno-error as well. (Maybe > a good idea to add this regardless of whether we set -Werror by default > or not.) > > > IIRC I enabled this in conntrack-tools long time ago, and I started > > getting reports on it breaking compilation with new gcc versions that > > were actually spewing new warnings. That was stopping users to install > > latest, probably -Werror is too agressive? > > Yes, I wasn't completely serious. Breaking users' builds for things they > may not be in control of is not the best idea. We could instead add a > configure option to enable strict mode, but checking for warnings is > something I usually do so probably not that important after all. Indeed. So let's leave things as is then.
