On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 09:36:29PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 12:27:34PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 19:50 +0100, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > Recently we discovered a serious bug in the compiler whereby we
> > > miscompiled
> > > several packages. The problem started with my ABI-changing patch which
> > > changed
> > > how empty classes are passed, as per the x86_64 psABI (so this bug only
> > > affects
> > > x86_64). The problem could arise when the code contained empty class
> > > templates.
> > > For more info see <https://gcc.gnu.org/PR84502>.
> > >
> > > I did another mass rebuild with a specially-tweaked gcc in order to find
> > > out
> > > which packages need to be rebuild with patched gcc-8.0.1-0.16. Sorry
> > > about
> > > this.
> > >
> > > This is the list:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > xautolock-2.2-18.fc24.src.rpm
> >
> > This seems like an odd entry. How can a package last built for F24
> > possibly be affected?
>
> Just guessing; Marek has rebuilt all the non-noarch src.rpm for rawhide
Exactly.
> and the package build diagnosed the ABI incompatibility. Perhaps the build
> normally only fails later than where the ABI issue was spotted.
>
> The instrumented GCC had a new option to compile using the previous
> (8.0.1-0.15 and earlier) wrong behavior and compiled everything twice,
> comparing dumps on what would be produced between the two.
Of course packages that were never built with gcc 8 are not affected, and need
not be rebuilt, but the list doesn't reflect that.
Marek
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
