Message-ID: <4DB0B605.4040201@ece.ntua.gr>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 01:56:05 +0300
From: Stratos Psomadakis <psomas@ece.ntua.gr>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110402 Icedove/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
CC: linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kbuild: implement several W= levels
References: <20110421213903.GB9660@merkur.ravnborg.org> <1303423109.24766.97.camel@Joe-Laptop>
In-Reply-To: <1303423109.24766.97.camel@Joe-Laptop>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1137
Lines: 33

On 22/04/2011 12:58 πμ, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 23:39 +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>> Building a kernel with "make W=1" produce far too much noise
>> to be usefull.
>> Divide the warning options in three groups:
>> W=1 - usefull warning options
>> W=2 - noisy but semi usefull warnign options
>> W=3 - almost pure noise options
>> +warning-1 := -Wextra
> []
>> +warning-2 += -Waggregate-return
> This is a different form for this first warning-2 declaration
> than the first warning-1 declaration.
>
> Maybe this should be := instead?
yeap...for the first warning-3 assignment too...
maybe something like this:
warning-1:=
warning-2:=
warning-3:=
right after 'ifeq' could help, so that you can alter/test the warnings'
levels more easily(without having to change between := and += for the
first warning of each warning level).

-- 
Stratos Psomadakis
<psomas@ece.ntua.gr>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/