Please review: 8006498 and 8008474

[David Holmes]

On 22/02/2013 12:48 AM, JOSEPH PROVINO wrote:
> Actually, from looking at this again, I thought David was suggesting
> that -Wundef
> should be added to ACCEPTABLE_WARNINGS for linux and bsd.

I was being ambivalent - I just wanted to see consistency. We should see 
where Mikael is adding -Wunused

David

> joe
>
> On 2/21/2013 8:19 AM, Zhengyu Gu wrote:
>> Agree with David, -Wundef should go to CFLAGS_WARN/DEFAULT on Solaris
>> if there is not particular reason not to.
>>
>> Other than that, look good to me.
>>
>> -Zhengyu
>>
>> On 2/20/2013 7:20 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> On 21/02/2013 7:47 AM, JOSEPH PROVINO wrote:
>>>> 8006498:  ASSERT and other symbols used incorrectly with #if are
>>>> supposed to be defined or not
>>>>
>>>> 8008474:  -Wundef should be added to the build to catch #if references
>>>> to undefined macros.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Webrev is here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jprovino/8006498/webrev.00/
>>>
>>> On bsd and linux you simply added -Wundef directly to the CFLAGS:
>>>
>>> +CFLAGS_WARN/DEFAULT = $(WARNINGS_ARE_ERRORS) $(ACCEPTABLE_WARNINGS)
>>> -Wundef
>>>
>>> but on Solaris you added it to ADDITIONAL_WARNINGS:
>>>
>>> +ADDITIONAL_WARNINGS = -Wpointer-arith -Wconversion -Wsign-compare
>>> -Wundef
>>>
>>> I guess it is a little confusing as to whether ACCEPTABLE_WARNINGS
>>> and ADDITIONAL_WARNINGS are meant to be the same thing.
>>>
>>> Otherwise all the #if -> #ifdef etc seem okay.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> joe
>>
>