Re: [PATCH v2] travis-ci: enable more warnings on travis linux-gcc job

From: Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 17, 2018, 14:29 UTC
Message-ID: <D8137CD9-9E11-4FBC-B89B-907C007FC6E9@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8A3_itjs0MRar+Aog=0yZDuAK2-x4MU=Rvqh2C6Le-7Aw@mail.gmail.com>

Show 32 quoted lines

> On 17 Mar 2018, at 09:01, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>>> diff --git a/ci/run-build-and-tests.sh b/ci/run-build-and-tests.sh
>>> index 3735ce413f..f6f346c468 100755
>>> --- a/ci/run-build-and-tests.sh
>>> +++ b/ci/run-build-and-tests.sh
>>> @@ -7,6 +7,22 @@
>>> 
>>> ln -s "$cache_dir/.prove" t/.prove
>>> 
>>> +if [ "$jobname" = linux-gcc ]; then
>>> +     gcc-6 --version
>>> +     cat >config.mak <<-EOF
>>> +     CC=gcc-6
>>> +     CFLAGS = -g -O2 -Wall
>>> +     CFLAGS += -Wextra
>>> +     CFLAGS += -Wmissing-prototypes
>>> +     CFLAGS += -Wno-empty-body
>>> +     CFLAGS += -Wno-maybe-uninitialized
>>> +     CFLAGS += -Wno-missing-field-initializers
>>> +     CFLAGS += -Wno-sign-compare
>>> +     CFLAGS += -Wno-unused-function
>>> +     CFLAGS += -Wno-unused-parameter
>>> +     EOF
>>> +fi
>> 
>> Why isn't this just turning on DEVELOPER=1 if we know we have a capable
>> compiler?
> 
> DEVELOPER=1 is always set even before this patch. It's set and
> exported in lib-travisci.sh.

I interpreted Peff's comment like this:

If DEVELOPER=1 is set and we detect a gcc-6 in the makefile, then we could set your additional flags in the makefile.

This way every developer with a new compiler would run these flags locally (if DEVELOPER=1 is set).

- Lars