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

Re: rawhide report: 20060215 changes



On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 15:50 -0500, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 09:47:25PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > gcc-4.1.0-0.27
> > > --------------
> > 
> > > * Tue Feb 14 2006 Jakub Jelinek <jakub redhat com> 4.1.0-0.26
> > > - update from gcc-4_1-branch (-r110903:110978)
> > >   - PRs fortran/20861, fortran/20871, fortran/25059, fortran/25070,
> > > 	fortran/25083, fortran/25088, fortran/25103, fortran/26038,
> > > 	fortran/26074, inline-asm/16194, libfortran/24685,
> > > 	libfortran/25425, target/26141, tree-optimization/26258
> > > - ABI change - revert to GCC 3.3 and earlier behaviour of
> > >   zero sized bitfields in packed structs (Michael Matz, PR middle-end/22275)
> > 
> > Do I read this correctly - ABI change?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > The whole FC5 mass rebuilds were in vain?
> 
> No, packed structures containing zero width bitfields are extremely rare.
OK, nevertheless, something to keep an eye on.

Should somebody find such a struct in a core part of a central library
(very low level packages (kernel, glibc, drivers) or GUI-toolskits seem
likely candidates, to me), ....

> And if something really cared about the exact layout of those structures,
> it wouldn't rely on this, as GCC < 3.4 behavior differed from 3.4/4.0.
This shouldn't matter here, because the rebuild was initiated by the GCC
4.0->4.1 transition.

Ralf



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