javac -Werror induced failures /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:54: warning: [rawtypes] found raw type: List ^ where E is a type-variable: E extends Object declared in interface List /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:54: warning: [rawtypes] found raw type: ArrayList where E is a type-variable: E extends Object declared in interface List /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:55: warning: [rawtypes] found raw type: List where T is a type-variable: T extends Object declared in class Class /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:55: warning: [rawtypes] found raw type: ArrayList E extends Object declared in interface Iterator /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:61: warning: [unchecked] unchecked call to add(E) as a member of the raw type List for (Iterator it = this.responseInterceptors.iterator(); ^ missing type arguments for generic class Iterator<E> where E is a type-variable: E extends Object declared in interface Iterator /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:69: warning: [unchecked] unchecked call to add(int,E) as a member of the raw type List ^ where E is a type-variable: E extends Object declared in interface List /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:77: warning: [unchecked] unchecked call to add(int,E) as a member of the raw type List missing type arguments for generic class List<E> where E is a type-variable: E extends Object declared in interface List /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:80: warning: [rawtypes] found raw type: Class E extends Object declared in interface List /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:81: warning: [rawtypes] found raw type: Iterator /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:90: warning: [rawtypes] found raw type: Class /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:91: warning: [rawtypes] found raw type: Iterator void removeResponseInterceptorByClass(Class clazz); ^ missing type arguments for generic class Class<T> where T is a type-variable: T extends Object declared in class Class /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:126: warning: [unchecked] unchecked call to add(E) as a member of the raw type List ^ missing type arguments for generic class List<E> where E is a type-variable: E extends Object declared in interface List /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:168: warning: [rawtypes] found raw type: List missing type arguments for generic class List<E> where E is a type-variable: E extends Object declared in interface List /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:223: warning: [unchecked] unchecked call to addAll(Collection<? extends E>) as a member of the raw type List where E is a type-variable: E extends Object declared in class ArrayList /local/mozilla/bugs/748470/mobile/android/base/httpclientandroidlib/protocol/BasicHttpProcessor.java:225: warning: [unchecked] unchecked call to addAll(Collection<? extends E>) as a member of the raw type List

Hello, can I take this bug?

Is this still an issue Nick, Chris? Either of you available to mentor this?

It's certainly not a compile problem. This is deep in thirdparty code, too, so I'm not interested in "fixing" this.

Thank you.

This problem should still exist, but has been hidden with an -Xlint:none in moz.build. This patch should unhide the poblem. However, this is in third party code. I'm unsure what our policy is on modifying this...? But, if that's out of the way, go for it. Make it compile with -Xlint:all!

(In reply to Chris Kitching [:ckitching] from comment #5) > Created attachment 8483838 [details] [diff] [review] > Unhide the problem. > > This problem should still exist, but has been hidden with an -Xlint:none in > moz.build. > This patch should unhide the poblem. > > However, this is in third party code. I'm unsure what our policy is on > modifying this...? We modify it as little as possible. We've revved httpclientlib once in the 2.5 years I've been involved, and that was for a recent sec bug. Certainly compiler warnings are not worth addressing.

Comment on attachment 8483838 [details] [diff] [review] Unhide the problem. Ah, I raced with Nick, seems the policy is against tweaking thirdparty code in this way. Forget everything I just said.

(In reply to Nick Alexander :nalexander from comment #6) > (In reply to Chris Kitching [:ckitching] from comment #5) > > Created attachment 8483838 [details] [diff] [review] > > Unhide the problem. > > > > This problem should still exist, but has been hidden with an -Xlint:none in > > moz.build. > > This patch should unhide the poblem. > > > > However, this is in third party code. I'm unsure what our policy is on > > modifying this...? > > We modify it as little as possible. We've revved httpclientlib once in the > 2.5 years I've been involved, and that was for a recent sec bug. Certainly > compiler warnings are not worth addressing. I raced with Nick again. That sounds sensible, though if so, why do we include their source? Why not just upstream the security patches and have them as a binary dependency? (assuming they're an open source library themselves). It seems like we're just needlessly slowing down our build, otherwise.

(In reply to Chris Kitching [:ckitching] from comment #8) > (In reply to Nick Alexander :nalexander from comment #6) > > (In reply to Chris Kitching [:ckitching] from comment #5) > > > Created attachment 8483838 [details] [diff] [review] > > > Unhide the problem. > > > > > > This problem should still exist, but has been hidden with an -Xlint:none in > > > moz.build. > > > This patch should unhide the poblem. > > > > > > However, this is in third party code. I'm unsure what our policy is on > > > modifying this...? > > > > We modify it as little as possible. We've revved httpclientlib once in the > > 2.5 years I've been involved, and that was for a recent sec bug. Certainly > > compiler warnings are not worth addressing. > > I raced with Nick again. > > That sounds sensible, though if so, why do we include their source? Why not > just upstream the security patches and have them as a binary dependency? > (assuming they're an open source library themselves). It seems like we're > just needlessly slowing down our build, otherwise. We build everything from source, even if it is available as an upstream binary. (Exception: some libraries used during testing.) When we started, the Android httpclientlib was buggy on devices. (It still is, but it's better.) This way, we own our bugs.