Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 21:59:35 -0400
From: Rich Felker <>
Subject: Re: A little more progress today with clang/LLVM

On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 08:47:04PM -0500, Richard Pennington wrote:
> I've decided to keep the musl build scheme with a few minor changes (e.g. 
> replace libgcc.a with libcompiler-rt.a).
> I'm now building for i386, arm, and x86_64. I enabled clang warnings -Werror 
> and had to inhibit a few, some of which look like they need some attention. 
> Here's my current list:
> -Werror -Qunused-arguments -Wno-unneeded-internal-declaration -Wno-cast-align 
> -Wno-incompatible-pointer-types -Wno-implicit-function-declaration -Wno-
> string-plus-int -Wno-pointer-sign -Wno-array-bounds

Aside from unused arguments (a bogus warning IMO) and string plus int
(why is this a warning?), these sound like they could be issues to
address. I cleaned up all the pointer signedness warnings (which
should be errors, per the C language) with gcc, so I'm unsure why
they're showing up again. Implicit function declarations sound
particularly bad, but gcc didn't report any to me. The rest are
*probably* non-issues, but I'd like to check them if you could send
the warning output to the list.

> I think that bits/alltypes.h might need some clang specific tweaking.

Can you elaborate?

> I'm going to start looking at the mips, ppc, and microblaze bits now, and will 
> look at warning elimination after.

I'll be happy to look at it for you. :)


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.