From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12172 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2004 02:39:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 12155 invoked from network); 27 Mar 2004 02:39:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at) (128.131.111.2) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 27 Mar 2004 02:39:14 -0000 Received: from [128.131.111.60] (acrux [128.131.111.60]) by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64A9713794; Sat, 27 Mar 2004 03:39:13 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 15:38:00 -0000 From: Gerald Pfeifer To: "Stephan T. Lavavej" Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, "Joseph S. Myers" , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] GCC Warning Options Documentation In-Reply-To: <20040216022657.60857109BCA@earth-ox.its.caltech.edu> Message-ID: References: <20040216022657.60857109BCA@earth-ox.its.caltech.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2004-03/txt/msg01615.txt.bz2 On Sun, 15 Feb 2004, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote: > The basic point of the patch is to clean up the -Wall issues, and to a > lesser extent the -Wunused issues. Feedback would be appreciated; I don't > know if I've missed something or done something wrong. This all looks fine -- sorry for failing to respond earlier! (In general it's easier to review smaller patches.) Would you mind providing a ChangeLog, reformat your patch to avoid long lines (>77 characters) in added/changed stuff, and resend your patch? I'll be offline next week, so I'm Cc:ing Joseph. Joseph, would you mind having a look then? > In particular, while I know how to bootstrap gcc, I don't know if that > generates the documentation, or how to test that my changes didn't screw > anything up. (I don't know Texi or whatever this format is.) You can do `make dvi` at the top level, for example. Gerald -- Gerald Pfeifer (Jerry) gerald@pfeifer.com http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/