GCC 2.95.3 and -Wreturn-type

Matthew Burgess ca9mbu at hermes.sunderland.ac.uk
Wed May 28 14:30:27 PDT 2003

On Wed, 28 May 2003 21:01:53 +0000 (UTC)
winkie at linuxfromscratch.org (Zack Winkles) wrote:

> Hi,
> As most of you know, the -Wreturn-type (and -Wno-return-type) options
> do not work for GCC 2.95.3 when it's compiled with just the C backend.
> Because of this we build the C++ backend as well in the book. I find
> this to be just plain wrong. Thus, a very small patch is attached that
> fixes the issue and allows these options in the C-only backend.

I don't know - I steered away from investigating that issue due to
my complete lack of knowledge of gcc's internals.  I didn't realise it
would be such an obvious two line fix!  Thanks Zack.

I don't mean this to deteriorate into another flame-war regarding the
inclusion/exclusion of 2.95.3's C++ functionality in LFS but...IMO this
patch now presents us with a working C compiler in as much as stuff that
should compile with it does.  I realise that providing the C++
functionality in LFS proper enables binary compatibility for certain
binary-only software (browser plugins and such like), but should this
really an issue for LFS to support, or is it more the realm of BLFS? We
already have a working, and much more standards compliant, C++ compiler
in the form of gcc-3.2.3 (or gcc-3.3 for those of us daring enough!).

Thanks again for the patch Zack,

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list