> Different folks have different views about warnings,
My view is that they generally indicate a problem that should be fixed
(and even if they warn of something that's unlikely to be a problem on
most if not all platforms, if making the code more type-correct would
squelch the complaint, it should be done, just in case there's a
platform on which it would be a problem, and so that the number of
warnings is reduced so that warnings stand out more), so I've checked
your change in.
However:
> but here's a simpel patch for the warning thats been around for a while at:
I've not seen it, either with GCC 2.7.2.3 on FreeBSD 3.4 or GCC 2.95.1
on Solaris 2.5.1/SPARC, which is why I, at least, haven't fixed it
before.
Just out of curiosity, what OS are you using ("uname -sr"), what type of
processor does it have ("uname -m" and "uname -p" - alas, I'm not sure
there's a standard for the "uname" flag to report the *generic* class of
processor, e.g. "this is an x86 processor", even if that's called
"i386", as opposed to "this is a 486" or "this is a P5-family processor"
or "this is a P6-family processor"), and what version of GCC are you
using ("gcc --version" - I infer that this is GCC, as the warning looks
like a "gcc -Wall" warning for a "printf"-like call, which we've
declared "proto_tree_add_text()" to be).
