From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 104EA384AB58 for ; Fri, 3 May 2024 17:52:47 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 104EA384AB58 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 104EA384AB58 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1714758768; cv=none; b=njbZbUAFlJguDF0R/wcHMr11q2fvNDjc4sr+Htt9mt+07SpePHA9dTx01Hd+xFJDUApM5wAVWBKZ8nHmAA1loxvQMboZkAjjkl2x2EB5A74SeTZSbr0TvhjzyVa8hYlXhuVWbFkjF/jt1WvgZCmP6dMHXSNbsxA+vjI9gxAKcZ0= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1714758768; c=relaxed/simple; bh=k1FuP+eCJY7cVEWNvqWdAd8T1+i8T9XjR88xr/+Q+Qc=; h=DKIM-Signature:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=Wo/3tj//vd9httyUSTZghulcXJfGiJJ+5joQ8VXNIoztD8/c6zgFkCxvRQnTxL9QbF/TsvjGjLxMgNIqPWCFuMlO5c6i42wGkKRK/Z57plfWHls9WF8Au3KMWpLjoHJaSFl24MWoacHhNZlPhYxTgwAFkVCzNa9qk5gIJmFacCs= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1714758766; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=k1FuP+eCJY7cVEWNvqWdAd8T1+i8T9XjR88xr/+Q+Qc=; b=aHwh0/FD0foZZv0SD3T3dE9cUKkdP0IfoopGmM0MB4AWJ1M4+ky438oyEayTlHpYs9NfeH f3+kKATdQ//Uz3ludfjRWJcYBKj1sle5PPNSXQUKbLnfuYMcJbToVdkuwYrad3NLpkEixP XbqifJV6zbsRgUfjiVWzJlGnveRkloE= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-655-Wbe18AQuO4SgZJ8068GJ4A-1; Fri, 03 May 2024 13:52:43 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Wbe18AQuO4SgZJ8068GJ4A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.7]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B32080017B; Fri, 3 May 2024 17:52:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.39.193.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C2C21C060D0; Fri, 3 May 2024 17:52:42 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Sebastian Huber Cc: Jonathan Wakely , GCC Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gcc-14: Mention that some warnings are now errors In-Reply-To: <593e45d9-8424-4c73-9050-8eb31ae5bde3@embedded-brains.de> (Sebastian Huber's message of "Fri, 3 May 2024 19:02:35 +0200") References: <20240415060539.97988-1-sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de> <1931504601.15974.1713961718420.JavaMail.zimbra@embedded-brains.de> <8d69a68a-1f2c-4018-aa3b-dcf18a9b9296@embedded-brains.de> <593e45d9-8424-4c73-9050-8eb31ae5bde3@embedded-brains.de> Date: Fri, 03 May 2024 19:52:41 +0200 Message-ID: <87plu2g4uu.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.7 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: * Sebastian Huber: > On 03.05.24 17:06, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >>> I think it would be helpful to reference this change in the C >>> section. This warning to error change causes some issues with >>> legacy software. >> I agree it should be mentioned, but I would put it in the caveats >> section at the top, not as the last item of the C section. >> How about this? OK for wwwdocs? > > This is fine for me as well, thanks. For me as well. Thanks, Florian