linux-kernel - Re: Overriding -Werror

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140815153353.GG17769@csclub.uwaterloo.ca>
Date:	Fri, 15 Aug 2014 11:33:53 -0400
From:	"Lennart Sorensen" <lsorense@...lub.uwaterloo.ca>
To:	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Overriding -Werror

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 03:21:19PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> I'm interested in being able to build-test kernels on various
> architectures while enabling extra warnings (make W=[123]). I'd like to
> be able to finish the builds and see all warnings, rather than seeing a
> failed build. However, GCC's -Werror is incompatible with this. There is
> plenty of code that will produce at least one warning, when warning
> verbosity is turned up. And GCC's -Werror is not guaranteed to remain
> stable over time; new versions may develop new warnings that may or may
> not be legitimate.

What ever is wrong with using '-k' with your make command?

-- 
Len Sorensen
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/