https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83732
--- Comment #8 from Stas Sergeev <stsp at users dot sourceforge.net> --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #7) > Using the non-standard packed attribute already makes the code non-portable. It may be non-standard, but its still portable as long as all compilers agree on implementing the particular extension. And the "packed" extension is AFAIK the very old one and most widely used. Unsupporting it is far from good decision. Non-standard things should not be automatically treated as "non-portable" IMO. Kenman Tsang: This bug was initially not about the wrong object size. It was about the wrong diagnostic that says "ignoring packed attribute" but actually packs an object perfectly well. Your example demonstrates the case where the "packed" attribute is really ignored (and the diagnostic is in line with that), so this is a different problem. For which I opened another ticket: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84194 You may want to join that ticket, leaving this one just for the diagnostic problem.
