[torquedev] Release Candidate for TORQUE 2.5.8

Glen Beane glen.beane at gmail.com
Tue Aug 23 04:47:51 MDT 2011

On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Michael Jennings <mej at lbl.gov> wrote:

> On Aug 22, 2011 8:17 PM, "Christopher Samuel" <samuel at unimelb.edu.au>
> wrote:
> > It appears that it might have crept in with SVN revision
> > 4385 (git hash 798b12e822079126abce273c3f43dd39a2c7faa7 for
> > those using a git svn clone like me).
> I don't think it "crept in."  It was a conscious choice.
> The problem with the "fix all warnings" theory is that it's not possible to
> do.  While you may fix all the warnings with your particular set of flags,
> nothing is done to suppress other warning flags that might be set (in
> CFLAGS, for example), possibly even from the environment, and then builds
> inexplicibly fail by default for unsuspecting users.
> The -Werror flag is a developers' tool.  I agree completely that developers
> should turn on warnings; in fact, my default CFLAGS does exactly that.  (And
> TORQUE failed to build as a result for many years.  While it may have built
> without *your* warnings, it never built without warnings.)  But that's
> developer-specific, and turning something on by default in configure.acaffects *users*, not just developers.  Why inflict build failures on those
> who can't fix them?

You make some good points.  I hope all developers use --enable-gcc-warnings
(it looks like some warnings did slip through though).  It is also helpful
to have people out in the community reporting warnings back to the
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.supercluster.org/pipermail/torquedev/attachments/20110823/227dc121/attachment.html 

More information about the torquedev mailing list