On 11/29/19 12:47 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
__ubsan_handle_function_type_mismatch* is something we don't use (Martin,
should we add such sanitizer? We have gimple_call_fntype vs. actual decl
types, but it would need some inspection on what the sanitizer really does),
but still e.g. clang compiled
On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 12:28:51PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> libsanitizer on trunk only bumps the soversion for asan, but the other
> libraries
> drop some symbols without bumping the soname, Are these changes intended, and
> should the soversions be bumped?
libsanitizer libs have upstream t
On 11/29/19 12:28 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
libsanitizer on trunk only bumps the soversion for asan, but the other libraries
drop some symbols without bumping the soname, Are these changes intended, and
should the soversions be bumped?
Hello.
Yes, it's intended. We should bump the library only
