On 20.09.2016 16:06, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
> On 19/09/16 22:00, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
>> On 18.09.2016 22:40, Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
>>> Thank you. Turned out it is reproducible in release build (at the least on 
>>> armel porterbox), but not in debug build.
>>> I'll look into it.
>> Ok, something fishy is going on with lambda captures. I believe I found an 
>> issue in either std::function or GCC
>> optimizer. Looks like a captured value ("this" in this case) is 
>> uninitialized or corrupted, but only if previous lambda
>> captures a certain amount of variables, no matter was it called or not. Ugh. 
>> I managed to reduce
>> the code to the following small example:
> Cool! Can you file a bug against g++-6 or libstdc++6 (or whatever you think is
> appropriate)? Have you found what optimization flag causes this? If it builds
> with -O1 or disabling some specific optimization, perhaps you can temporarily
> use that to avoid autoremoval from testing.

Sounds good for both points. Indeed, it builds with -O1. I will make a 
packaging change and file a bug.

Reply via email to