This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Should we continue to hold up 2.20 for -Wundef fixes?
- From: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- To: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 14:18:32 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: Re: Should we continue to hold up 2.20 for -Wundef fixes?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <54073A95 dot 7000105 at redhat dot com>
Unlike Joseph, I don't think any -Wundef fixes are especially
risky--largely because of the ease of comparing .o files to convince
ourselves each change is safe. But I don't have a strong opinion about
which side of the release cut they land on. My previous recommendations
about this were based on the notion of people taking the released source
tree (perhaps some time in the future), seeing a zillion noisy warnings,
and coming back to us thinking something Must Be Wrong (or, similarly, not
noticing the messages that really did matter to their configuration when
they were lost in a sea of distracting -Wundef warnings). But that is just
one consideration, and a fairly weak one, compared to continued delay and
other people's differing perceptions of the risk of further changes going
in soon.