Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 1:59 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Maybe there's some strange cross-distro difference here, but
>> what I'm wondering is if there's a difference in CFLAGS.
>> My build used
>>
>> CFLAGS = -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith
>> -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Werror=vla -Wendif-labels
>> -Wmissing-format-attribute -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3 -Wcast-function-type
>> -Wshadow=compatible-local -Wformat-security -Wmissing-variable-declarations
>> -fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv -fexcess-precision=standard
>> -Wno-format-truncation -Wno-stringop-truncation -g -O2
> Yeah, interestingly I didn't see the warning with CFLAGS your build
> used but got it if I use -O0 instead of -O2.
I checked the buildfarm, and (so far) adder and flaviventris have
shown this warning, but nothing else has. adder is using gcc 14.2.0
with -O0, while flaviventris is using gcc 16.0.0 with -O0. Also
I tried -O0 with gcc 15.1.1 on my Fedora 42 box, and now it shows the
warning. So maybe the difference is just -O0? But I think there are
other buildfarm animals using that, so I'm not certain we've explained
the difference fully.
Anyway, based on that I think there's enough reason to go ahead
with your patch.
regards, tom lane
