Re: Use of -Werror in systemtap Module Makefiles

[David Wilder <dwilder at us dot ibm dot com>]

Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:

> Hi -
>
> On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 12:15:00PM -0700, David Wilder wrote:
>  
>
> > [...]
> >    
> >
> > > > /usr/local/share/systemtap/runtime/vsprintf.c:428: warning: frame size
> > > > of '_stp_vsnprintf' is 256 bytes
> > > > [...]
> > > >        
> > > This actually looks good to know.  [...]
> > >      
>
>  
>
> > I agree this is good to know, when we are in development. But what
> > about the user that has no clues of the details?
> >    
>
> Consider the alternative: a meaningful warning that developers didn't
> encounter during testing.  Would you prefer that systemtap err on the
> side of safety, or on the side of convenience?
>
>  
>
> > [...] But don't let the user find our dirt :)
> >    
>
> I think this applies only if we can gather a much more thorough test
> bank than we have managed to date.  If on the other hand we suspect
> that there exist potentially dark corners,

no dark corners I can think of :)
So the alternative is working with the distros to keep things like 
-mwarn-framesize to a reasonable value.

I will see if we can cleanup  _stp_vsnprintf before changing the kernel 
config.

> then I'd like to keep
> e.g. assertion-checking on, conservative compilation on, and prepare
> for future problem notifications.
>
> - FChE
>  


--
David Wilder
IBM Linux Technology Center
Beaverton, Oregon, USA 
dwilder@us.ibm.com
(503)578-3789