From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42694) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ixCT9-0004z7-U6 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 11:15:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ixCT8-00027K-RP for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 11:15:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:58428) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ixCT8-00027C-Nm for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 11:15:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ixCT8-000204-JY for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Jan 2020 11:15:02 -0500 Subject: [bug#39306] [PATCH] gnu: Add xsettingsd. Resent-Message-ID: From: Marius Bakke In-Reply-To: <87k1596ii6.fsf@daviwil.com> References: <87r1zlvymv.fsf@daviwil.com> <87zhe5nnss.fsf@devup.no> <87lfpp6n6v.fsf@daviwil.com> <87o8ulngsc.fsf@devup.no> <87k1596ii6.fsf@daviwil.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 17:14:00 +0100 Message-ID: <87d0b0orav.fsf@devup.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: David Wilson Cc: 39306@debbugs.gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain David Wilson writes: > Marius Bakke writes: > >> It is definitively OK to disable warnings coming from dependencies. In >> fact, that is what we are supposed to do, and used to do until the >> switch to GCC 7. >> >> To clarify, when we switched to GCC 7, its search paths were changed >> from C{,PLUS}_INCLUDE_PATH to CPATH. The only[*] difference between >> these search paths is that headers found on the former are treated as >> "system headers", which disables warnings. >> >> [*] Besides the fact that GCC 6 and later is very picky about the order >> of entries in C_INCLUDE_PATH, which is why we had to switch; see >> for details. > > Thanks for the background, that was helpful! I've been out of the loop > on GCC changes for a while so it's good to know that this happened. > > I've made the suggested changes to the summary and description, attached > the updated patch. Excellent, LGTM! --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEu7At3yzq9qgNHeZDoqBt8qM6VPoFAl4zAMgACgkQoqBt8qM6 VPpoAQgAqHzWjX7RSiL3mFIIUN+NPmAFlYy+ttEJoBnIKU4NAZQ5OcGLyXenp+HR nW7g7lBoFPxJtYPmrrCQ32ENOPGa63pKhP84tLeYdPl/WfzR+r7PWha8hqIG4wLp zbYw0lko/8NHA38zRD6NkcKwMf7ae8OLrgu/+8wboMVe2S74x8tZlnYdodpfQ54g 1kPlmeqWMKPbhvipyRf1Sw5xCd7MJtHHRpjgmWP40jNif4VedQVsMKKeNR9NmhrX J7SdjBArpBZfFp0TlREG3gCh0ZyK51xmJGz49FJXwen1drVEep45DLlXjSuBo6XQ UY6Ep4xtCCKYfpmzs2sJ1vXyRfmfOQ== =lCW0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--