Re: [PATCH] config.mak.dev: add -Wformat
- From
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
- Date
- Dec 27, 2018, 18:59 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20181227185900.GE146609@google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20181012191531.GA22611@hank.intra.tgummerer.com>
+cc: Masaya Suzuki In October, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> On 10/12, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Jeff King wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 07:40:37PM +0100, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
Show 14 quoted lines
>>>> 801fa63a90 ("config.mak.dev: add -Wformat-security", 2018-09-08) added
>>>> the -Wformat-security to the flags set in config.mak.dev. In the gcc
>>>> man page this is documented as:
>>>>
>>>> If -Wformat is specified, also warn about uses of format
>>>> functions that represent possible security problems. [...]
>>>>
>>>> That commit did however not add the -Wformat flag, and -Wformat is not
>>>> specified anywhere else by default, so the added -Wformat-security had
>>>> no effect. Newer versions of gcc (gcc 8.2.1 in this particular case)
>>>> warn about this and thus compilation fails with this option set.
>> [...]
>>> -Wformat is part of -Wall, which we already turn on by default (even for
>>> non-developer builds).[...]
>> Thomas, do you use autoconf to generate config.mak.autogen? I'm >> wondering if that produces a CFLAGS that doesn't include -Wall. > > No, this was all my mistake :)
As discussed in [1], autoconf appears to not put -Wall in CFLAGS:
$ make configure
GEN configure
$ ./configure
[...]
config.status: creating config.mak.autogen
config.status: executing config.mak.autogen commands
$ grep CFLAGS config.mak.autogen
CFLAGS = -g -O2
PTHREAD_CFLAGS=-pthreadSo this trap for the unwary is still around.
Can we revive this patch? Does it just need a clearer commit message, or were there other objections?
Show 9 quoted lines
>>> I'm not opposed to making config.mak.dev a bit more redundant to handle >>> this case, but we'd probably want to include all of -Wall, since it >>> contains many other warnings we'd want to make sure are enabled. >> >> Do you mean putting -Wall instead of -Wformat? >> >> Should we add -Wextra too? From a quick test, it seems to build okay. > > We do have that with setting DEVELOPER=extra-all.
Even better. What do you think of making DEVELOPER=YesPlease imply that?
Thanks, Jonathan
[1] https://public-inbox.org/git/CAJB1erVmZQd_kLU1fqL7cURrEUz2EJ4Br0kgVQt7T-mk3s95dQ@mail.gmail.com/