Hello Marcos, > I tested the package with this patch and it performs well as far as i > can tell.
What I was initially worried about were tests that touched that specific part of code, so I was interested in getting a testcase that covered that. I'm not sure if that's the test that you performed but (as per the rest of this email) that's ok. > I also tested it with your suggestion (appending -fcommon CFLAG) and it > also builds and seems to work properly. > > Meanwhile upstream does not adopt a solution, i would prefer to stick > with this hack as the use of -fcommon flag seems to be discouraged at > least by Gentoo distro devs [1] The reason Gentoo discourages that is because it's not fixing the problem upstream, it makes GCC10 fallback to the same behavior as GCC9 (-fcommon), this change is the less intrusive one as we are 100% sure that we will not change the behavior of upstream. I believe the reason Gentoo discourages that is that they want to encourage people to fix upstream. I would say that this is also Debian's position on the matter since we always fix upstream when possible. Although this comes with the presumption that we are sure of the fixes applied and that's where I was a little bit worried, but I took a look at it again and double checked that the variable being removed is unused. debian/0.7+debian-2 sponsored! Thanks for your work Marcos! -- Samuel Henrique <samueloph>
