Greetings! Thanks so much, your patch is obviously right and has now been committed. Just got my own gcc-4.6 from Debian and confirmed the prior problem too.
gcc-4.6 exposes quite a few set-but-unused variables issues, which I think should be properly fixed post release. Should I have configure turn off this warning when this compiler is detected? Thoughts? Take care, Jerry James <loganje...@gmail.com> writes: > The Fedora project is in the midst of a mass package rebuild. One of > the reasons for doing this is so that all C/C++/... code in Fedora 15 > packages will have been built with GCC 4.6 (to be). The GCL package > failed to rebuild. The build failure looks exactly like the one > reported here, but this time GCC did emit warnings: > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gcl-devel/2005-07/msg00028.html > > I think the "volatile" annotations are still not correct. The > attached patch results in a successful build for me. I think the > print.d portion is obviously correct. For the prog.c portion, the > pointers in new_top and bodysv are used after the setjmp call, so > should also be volatile. The tinf variable is only used to iterate, > and is initialized after the setjmp call, so it does not need to be > volatile. The tinf_base variable (as also new_top and bodysv) should > be declared with the "volatile" AFTER the asterisk, rather than > before, because it is the pointer itself that needs to survive the > setjmp call, not the thing pointed to. > > Regards, > -- > Jerry James > http://www.jamezone.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > Gcl-devel mailing list > Gcl-devel@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel -- Camm Maguire c...@maguirefamily.org ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah _______________________________________________ Gcl-devel mailing list Gcl-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
