Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

[Sam James]

> On 15 Nov 2022, at 13:30, Zack Weinberg <zack@owlfolio.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022, at 12:03 AM, Sam James wrote:
>>> On 13 Nov 2022, at 00:43, Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Although there will be problems with people who run "./configure 
>>> CFLAGS='-Werror'", that sort of usage has always been problematic and 
>>> unsupported by Autoconf, so we can simply continue to tell people "don't do 
>>> that".
>>> 
>> 
>> Is there somewhere in the autoconf docs we actually say this?
>> 
>> I've seen a few instances of folks adding it themselves very
>> early in their configure scripts (which is a pain for distros
>> anyway) which then ends up affecting the rest.
> 
> It's mentioned in the NEWS entry for 2.70: 
> https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/autoconf.git/tree/NEWS#n170

Thanks, sorry, I didn't think to check NEWS. This is good enough for me to link 
folks to, anyway, for the time being.

> Note that there have been bug reports for cases where running builds with 
> more warnings than configure uses (and I think also -Werror), means that 
> configure checks spuriously succeed (i.e. configure reports that something is 
> available, but then you get compiler errors on the code that tries to use 
> it).  I can't remember any concrete examples right now, though.

I can totally imagine that, don't stress about the examples.

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP