- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nowerror
- From: Adrian Bunk <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 10:48:35 +0200
- Message-id: <Y/xuYyZa1rxLu7BK@localhost>
- In-reply-to: <Y/uyJXpBtFcTA9ul@alf.mars>
- References: <Y/hW/Z2kB5pIa5YP@yoda> <Y/uTwVI/lmfL48Vv@localhost> <Y/uyJXpBtFcTA9ul@alf.mars>
On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 08:25:25PM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 07:15:45PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > What you describe is an RC bug as soon as the more recent toolchain
> > becomes default, and the correct solution is to not build with -Werror.
> > DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nowerror would imply that building with -Werror
> > by default would be OK, but there are already too many FTBFS due
> > to -Werror.
> I would happily agree with all of this, but I do not see consensus on
My point is that an opt-out DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nowerror would make the
problem worse for the "FTBFS on buildds" problem, since it would result
in more people building their packages with -Werror by default.
> The problem here specifically arises, because we do not have consensus
> on -Werror being a bad idea in release builds.
Strictly disallowing all usage of -Werror (which might be set by the
maintainer, but more often by upstream) would be controversial.
It would also be hard to define what exactly would be forbidden.
Individual warnings can be turned into errors, and our hardening
flags set -Werror=format-security.
There might be more consensus for language in Policy discouraging
-Werror that leaves maintainers room to diverge from the recommendation?