On 12/02/2011 02:08 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> On 12/02/2011 04:12 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> On 12/01/2011 07:11 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
>>> On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 15:45:48 +0100
>>> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>
On 12/01/2011 11:23 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> Ralf,
>
> On 11/18/2011 05:
On 12/02/2011 04:12 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 12/01/2011 07:11 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
>> On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 15:45:48 +0100
>> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/01/2011 11:23 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
Ralf,
On 11/18/2011 05:53 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 11/18/2011 05:32
On 12/01/2011 07:11 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 15:45:48 +0100
> Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
>> On 12/01/2011 11:23 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
>>> Ralf,
>>>
>>> On 11/18/2011 05:53 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 11/18/2011 05:32 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> It already builds with -W
On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 21:19:14 +0100
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Paul Howarth wrote:
> > This is weird: I can't reproduce these either locally in mock or in
> > koji:
> >
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3555838
>
> -Wstrict-aliasing only works if -fstrict-aliasing is enabled, so
Paul Howarth wrote:
> This is weird: I can't reproduce these either locally in mock or in
> koji:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3555838
-Wstrict-aliasing only works if -fstrict-aliasing is enabled, so if you're
using -fno-strict-aliasing (or an optimization level below -
On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 15:45:48 +0100
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 12/01/2011 11:23 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> > Ralf,
> >
> > On 11/18/2011 05:53 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >> On 11/18/2011 05:32 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> >>> It already builds with -Wall and there are no warnings:
> >> This doesn't m
On 12/01/2011 11:23 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> Ralf,
>
> On 11/18/2011 05:53 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> On 11/18/2011 05:32 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
>>> It already builds with -Wall and there are no warnings:
>> This doesn't mean much.
>>
>> Adding a couple of more agressive options, this is what h
Ralf,
On 11/18/2011 05:53 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 11/18/2011 05:32 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
>> It already builds with -Wall and there are no warnings:
> This doesn't mean much.
>
> Adding a couple of more agressive options, this is what happens to pptp:
>
> orckit_quirks.c:65:2: warning: mis
lör 2011-11-19 klockan 00:23 -0500 skrev Gregory Maxwell:
> This use to be more true, but there are multiple levels of -Wstrict-aliasing
> and
> I would be _highly_ surprised if the default gave a false alarm. I think you
> can reliably say that if you get a warning at the default level then you
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 11/19/2011 06:23 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Ralf Corsepius
>> wrote:
>>> If GCC is sure something is wrong, it is supposed to raise errors.
>>
>> This isn't true. E.g. you can write code which reads and uses
>> uninitialized memory
>
On 11/19/2011 06:23 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> [1] -Wstrict-aliasing is one of these cases.
>> The spots such warnings point to, often are broken, but not always,
>> because GCC has difficulties in identifying these.
>
> This use to be m
On 11/19/2011 01:23 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 11/18/2011 11:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andrew Haley writes:
On 11/18/2011 05:53 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> pptp.c:459:33: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer might break
>> strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
Bingo!
On 11/18/2011 11:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Haley writes:
>> > On 11/18/2011 05:53 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>> >> pptp.c:459:33: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer might break
>>> >> strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
>> > Bingo! Bugs like this must be fixed.
> Sometimes th
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> [1] -Wstrict-aliasing is one of these cases.
> The spots such warnings point to, often are broken, but not always,
> because GCC has difficulties in identifying these.
This use to be more true, but there are multiple levels of -Wstrict-ali
On 11/19/2011 04:57 AM, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
>> Indeed, -Wall is not really all. :-) -Wall -Wextra is closer to all, but
>> there are still some things those won't warn about, e.g. -Wwrite-strings
>> catches places which use a string literal as a potentially writable ch
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Indeed, -Wall is not really all. :-) -Wall -Wextra is closer to all, but
> there are still some things those won't warn about, e.g. -Wwrite-strings
> catches places which use a string literal as a potentially writable char *
> instead of a const char *.
-O2 is required by
Paul Howarth wrote:
> Hmm, thanks for that. I naively assumed that -Wall was "all warnings"!
> I'll look into those.
Indeed, -Wall is not really all. :-) -Wall -Wextra is closer to all, but
there are still some things those won't warn about, e.g. -Wwrite-strings
catches places which use a string
Andrew Haley writes:
> On 11/18/2011 05:53 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> pptp.c:459:33: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer might break
>> strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
> Bingo! Bugs like this must be fixed.
Sometimes that's easier said than done. -fno-strict-aliasing might
On 11/18/2011 05:53 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> pptp.c:459:33: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer might break
> strict-aliasing rules [-Wstrict-aliasing]
Bingo! Bugs like this must be fixed.
Andrew.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/ma
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:53:03 +0100
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 11/18/2011 05:32 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:28:27 +
> > Andrew Haley wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/18/2011 11:31 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> >>> One of my packages, pptp, suffers occasional segfaults as reported
> >>
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 18:43:30 +0200
Jussi Lehtola wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 16:32:23 +
> Paul Howarth wrote:
> > On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:28:27 +
> > Andrew Haley wrote:
> >
> > > On 11/18/2011 11:31 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> > > > One of my packages, pptp, suffers occasional segfaults
On 11/18/2011 05:32 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:28:27 +
> Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> On 11/18/2011 11:31 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
>>> One of my packages, pptp, suffers occasional segfaults as reported
>>> in http://bugzilla.redhat.com/749455. However, whilst investigating
>>>
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 16:32:23 +
Paul Howarth wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:28:27 +
> Andrew Haley wrote:
>
> > On 11/18/2011 11:31 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> > > One of my packages, pptp, suffers occasional segfaults as reported
> > > in http://bugzilla.redhat.com/749455. However, whilst
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:28:27 +
Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 11/18/2011 11:31 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> > One of my packages, pptp, suffers occasional segfaults as reported
> > in http://bugzilla.redhat.com/749455. However, whilst investigating
> > this, it seems to be the case that simply rebuild
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 6:31 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> 2. How to determine what the actual problem is, e.g. a problem with the
> way the code is written leading to unsafe optimizations, or a gcc bug?
[Obviously Andrew's look at warnings advice is good but also…]
See if you can reproduce it when
On 11/18/2011 11:31 AM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> One of my packages, pptp, suffers occasional segfaults as reported in
> http://bugzilla.redhat.com/749455. However, whilst investigating this,
> it seems to be the case that simply rebuilding the package using no
> optimization (-O0) as opposed to the d
One of my packages, pptp, suffers occasional segfaults as reported in
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/749455. However, whilst investigating this,
it seems to be the case that simply rebuilding the package using no
optimization (-O0) as opposed to the default -O2 is enough to stop this
happening.
This r
27 matches
Mail list logo
