Libguestfs - Sep 2009 - [PATCH] Disable -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations

-- 
Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat  http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines.  Tiny program with many
powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc.
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top
-------------- next part --------------
>From e922f13d6b9b4da8040b721b20f858036f7b7e06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Richard Jones <rjones at trick.home.annexia.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:39:42 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] Disable -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations

This warning indicates that GCC could not do a particular sort
of loop optimization.  It pops up randomly in certain forms of
looping code, and seems safe to ignore.
---
 configure.ac |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index b28f316..95ab51e 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ if test "$gl_gcc_warnings" = yes; then
   nw="$nw -Winline"                 # daemon.h's asprintf_nowarn
   nw="$nw -Wshadow"                 # numerous, plus we're not
unanimous
   # ?? -Wstrict-overflow
+  nw="$nw -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations" # just a warning that an
optimization
+                                    # was not possible, safe to ignore
 
   gl_MANYWARN_ALL_GCC([ws])
   gl_MANYWARN_COMPLEMENT([ws], [$ws], [$nw])
-- 
1.6.2.5

Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH 1/5] Disable -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations
>
> This warning indicates that GCC could not do a particular sort
> of loop optimization.  It pops up randomly in certain forms of
> looping code, and seems safe to ignore.
> ---
>  configure.ac |    2 ++
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index b28f316..95ab51e 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ if test "$gl_gcc_warnings" = yes; then
>    nw="$nw -Winline"                 # daemon.h's
asprintf_nowarn
>    nw="$nw -Wshadow"                 # numerous, plus we're
not unanimous
>    # ?? -Wstrict-overflow
> +  nw="$nw -Wunsafe-loop-optimizations" # just a warning that an
optimization
> +                                    # was not possible, safe to ignore
ACK.
Unfortunate that they chose such a misleading name.
I agree it is safe to disable it.