Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

[Sam James]

> On 13 Nov 2022, at 00:43, Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
> 
> On 2022-11-11 07:11, Aaron Ballman wrote:
>> We believe the runtime behavior is sufficiently dangerous to
>> warrant a conservative view that any call to a function will be a call
>> that gets executed at runtime, hence a definitive signature mismatch
>> is something we feel comfortable diagnosing (in some form) by default.
> 
> As long as these diagnostics by default do not cause the compiler to exit 
> with nonzero status, we should be OK with Autoconf-generated 'configure' 
> scripts. Although there will be problems with people who run "./configure 
> CFLAGS='-Werror'", that sort of usage has always been problematic and 
> unsupported by Autoconf, so we can simply continue to tell people "don't do 
> that".
> 

Is there somewhere in the autoconf docs we actually say this?

I've seen a few instances of folks adding it themselves very
early in their configure scripts (which is a pain for distros
anyway) which then ends up affecting the rest.

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP