[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: -Werror and --disable-werror
From: |
Robert Millan |
Subject: |
Re: -Werror and --disable-werror |
Date: |
Sat, 19 Sep 2009 22:38:49 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 04:12:59PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > -Werror is not in effect. This will help ensuring that all new code is
> > checked to be warning-free before commit (incidentally, I found a newly
> > introduced bug thanks to this just minutes before enabling it).
> >
> >
> If you mean this change:
>
> + /* Any value different than `p.offset' will satisfy the check during
> + first loop. */
> + lastaddr = !p.offset;
> +
>
> Then there was no bug here.
> if (labeln && lastaddr == p.offset)
> return grub_error (GRUB_ERR_BAD_PART_TABLE, "loop detected");
>
> labeln++;
> if ((labeln & (labeln - 1)) == 0)
> lastaddr = p.offset;
>
> labeln is 0 during first loop run and then lastaddr is set. I explicitly
> omitted initing variables to have smaller loop detector
Oh, I see. Well, since in this case there's no bug, as long as the warning
is gone it should be ok. Any other idea on how to archieve that?
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."