On Mon, 22 Feb 2016 12:55:56 +0100 Marek Polacek <polacek@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > In the past few days and weeks we did a mass rebuild of Fedora > rawhide packages in mock with GCC 6 (and corresponding libtool) and > for those packages that failed also rebuilt the same package with > gcc-5.3.1-2.fc23.x86_64 to quickly remove from the list packages that > fail for non-GCC related reasons. > > There were 17741 packages overall (last year we had 16230 packages). > 16281 packages built fine, 883 packages failed to build with both > gcc-6 and gcc-5 (ignored for this analysis, unlikely to be GCC 6 > related). This left us with 577 packages that had to be analyzed. > That is a lot -- last year we only had to examine 236 packages. So > that's why it's taken so long. > > As usually, there will be a "porting to" document to ease the > transition to the new GCC. We already have > https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-6/porting_to.html, even though this document > is still somewhat in flux. > > The biggest change hands-down this year is the change of the default > standard for g++ from -std=gnu++98 to -std=gnu++14; this has caused > considerable churn, as you might have noticed on this mailing list. > Unfortunately, many packages weren't prepared to handle C++11. > Changes in libstdc++ often revealed very poor programming practices. > > Before I describe the results in more detail, I'd like to thank Jon > Wakely and Jakub Jelinek for their indispensable help. > > Any mistakes, omissions, or mis-categorizations are solely mine. I see an inconsistency between s390(x) and other arches with "stdarg" handling, build on s390(x) of a C++ lib fails with error: first argument to ‘va_arg’ not of type ‘va_list’ Please see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1314545 for more details and a reproducer. Dan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
