Re: buildfarm warnings

Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> writes:
> Is there any check for warnings from new code, other than those buildfarm
> members with -Werror ?

I periodically grep the buildfarm logs for interesting warnings.
There are a lot of uninteresting ones :-(, so I'm not sure how
automatable that'd be.  I do use a prefiltering script, which
right now says there are
13917 total warnings from 41 buildfarm members
of which it thinks all but 350 are of no interest.  Most of those
350 are of no interest either, but I didn't bother to make
filter rules for them yet ...

> It'd be better to avoid warnings, allowing members to use -Werror, rather than
> to allow/ignore warnings, which preclude that possibility.

The ones I classify as "uninteresting" are mostly from old/broken
compilers.  I don't think it'd be profitable to try to convince
prairiedog's 17-year-old compiler that we don't have uninitialized
variables, for instance.

> I'm of the impression that some people have sql access to BF logs.

Yeah.  I'm not sure exactly what the access policy is for that machine;
I know we'll give out logins to committers, but not whether there's
any precedent for non-committers.

> pg_basebackup.c:1261:35: warning: storing the address of local variable archive_filename in progress_filename [-Wdangling-pointer=]
> 	=> new in 23a1c6578 - looks like a real error

I saw that one a few days ago but didn't get around to looking
more closely yet.  It does look fishy, but it might be okay
depending on when the global variable can be accessed.

Another new one that maybe should be silenced is

/mnt/resource/bf/build/skink-master/HEAD/pgsql.build/../pgsql/src/backend/access/heap/vacuumlazy.c:1129:41: warning: 'freespace' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]

Only skink and frogfish are showing that, though.

			regards, tom lane