[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?)
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?) |
Date: |
Thu, 15 Jun 2006 08:30:08 +0200 |
address@hidden (Eric Blake) wrote:
...
> configuring with -Werror. Once configured, though, running
> make with -Werror is good policy for portability checks.
>
> What I meant to ask you to try, rather than
> 'configure CFLAGS=-Werror; make', was:
>
> $ ./configure CFLAGS=-Wall
> $ make CFLAGS='-Wall -Werror'
For general software development, I find that
it helps to add at least -O or -O2 to the list.
With optimization enabled, gcc performs more analysis,
and will detect e.g., variables that may be used defined,
that it wouldn't otherwise detect.
- Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Eric Blake, 2006/06/14
- Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?),
Jim Meyering <=
- Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Paul Eggert, 2006/06/15
- Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Santiago Vila, 2006/06/15
- Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Eric Blake, 2006/06/15
- stackovf implementation [Was: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?)], Eric Blake, 2006/06/15
- Re: stackovf implementation [Was: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?)], Eric Blake, 2006/06/20
- Re: stackovf implementation [Was: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?)], Santiago Vila, 2006/06/21
- Re: stackovf implementation, Eric Blake, 2006/06/22
Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: regex.c not 64-bit clean (?), Bruno Haible, 2006/06/21