[PATCH] macros: Globally add --disable-silent-rules to configure

[Matthew Garrett]

On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 07:34:48PM +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Aug 2011 19:16:54 +0200, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > It's a development-only 
> > option. You have no idea what gcc will decide is a warning in future, so 
> > it's effectively a "Please break my build in six months" toggle.
> 
> I believe -Werror is appropriate for .src.rpm as only .arch.rpm is what is
> being shipped to the real users.  -Werror is only of concern to the package
> maintainer who should keep warnings under control.  -Werror is probably the
> most easy way to keep them non-regressing.

Adding an additional warning to gcc that triggers for a specific 
application doesn't make that application any more broken than it was 
before the warning was added. If a package fails to build in a mass 
rebuild because -Werror was enabled then that's additional work for 
several people to fix something that may not have ever actually been 
broken.

Warnings are appropriate during development. -Werror may even make sense 
when packagers are performing local builds before upload. I just don't 
think there's any way that the improvement in quality it'd bring to the 
distribution outweighs the extra effort involved in maintaining it 
whenever the toolchain changes.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org