Re: GCC 8 ABI change on x86_64

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 12:27:34PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 19:50 +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Recently we discovered a serious bug in the compiler whereby we miscompiled
> > several packages.  The problem started with my ABI-changing patch which changed
> > how empty classes are passed, as per the x86_64 psABI (so this bug only affects
> > x86_64).  The problem could arise when the code contained empty class templates.  
> > For more info see <https://gcc.gnu.org/PR84502>.
> > 
> > I did another mass rebuild with a specially-tweaked gcc in order to find out
> > which packages need to be rebuild with patched gcc-8.0.1-0.16.  Sorry about
> > this.
> > 
> > This is the list:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> >   xautolock-2.2-18.fc24.src.rpm
> 
> This seems like an odd entry. How can a package last built for F24
> possibly be affected?

Just guessing; Marek has rebuilt all the non-noarch src.rpm for rawhide
and the package build diagnosed the ABI incompatibility.  Perhaps the build
normally only fails later than where the ABI issue was spotted.

The instrumented GCC had a new option to compile using the previous
(8.0.1-0.15 and earlier) wrong behavior and compiled everything twice,
comparing dumps on what would be produced between the two.

	Jakub
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux