On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 09:26:13PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > > On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:34:23 PST, Ray Lee said:
> > > > On 10/31/06, Martin J. Bligh <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > At some point we should get rid of all the "politeness" warnings, just
> > > > > > because they can end up hiding the _real_ ones.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yay! Couldn't agree more. Does this mean you'll take patches for all the
> > > > > uninitialized variable crap from gcc 4.x ?
> > > >
> > > > What would be useful in the short term is a tool that shows only the
> > > > new warnings that didn't exist in the last point release.
>
> Would it be possible to create a new verbosity level like V=2 to hide
> those "politeness" warnings so that by default everybody still would see
> all of them, but those needing to track regressions could use it and only
> see severe ones?
I suggest you try out make V=2 one day.
It does not compress warnings but tells you why something got rebuild.
Sam
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
