Re: Sourceware mitigating and preventing the next xz-backdoor

On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 4:11 PM Paul Koning via Gdb wrote: > > > On Apr 9, 2024, at 3:59 PM, Jonathon Anderson via Gcc > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2024, 10:57 Andreas Schwab wrote: > > > >> On Apr 09 2024, anderson.jonath...@gmail.com wrote: > >> > >>> - This xz backdoor injection

Re: Sourceware mitigating and preventing the next xz-backdoor

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 10:33 AM Martin Uecker via Gdb wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, dem 03.04.2024 um 16:00 +0200 schrieb Michael Matz: > > [...] > > (And, FWIW, testing for features isn't "complex". And have you looked at > > other build systems? I have, and none of them are less complex, just > >

Re: Sourceware mitigating and preventing the next xz-backdoor

On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 7:35 PM Paul Koning via Gdb wrote: > [...] > > I agree that GDB, and for that matter other projects with significant numbers > of contributors, are not nearly as likely to be vulnerable to this sort of > attack. But I worry that xz may not be the only project that's

Re: Sourceware mitigating and preventing the next xz-backdoor

On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 6:09 PM Guinevere Larsen via Gdb wrote: > [...] > What likely happened for the maintainer who acted in bad faith was that > they entered the project with bad faith intent from the start - seeing > as they were only involved with the project for 2 years, and there was > much

Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults?

On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 1:18 PM Paul Eggert wrote: > ... > If Clang's threatened pickiness were of some real use elsewhere, it > might be justifiable for default Clang to break Autoconf. But so far we > haven't seen real-world uses that would justify this pickiness for > Autoconf's use of 'char

Re: [OMPD] API version formatting

On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 1:47 PM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 01:26:59PM -0400, y2s1982 . via Gcc wrote: > > I have a question on API version formatting. > > I have been looking at the get_api_version() and get_api_version_string() > > documentation: > >

Re: GCC 10.0.1 Status Report (2019-04-30)

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 2:19 PM Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote: > > Status > == > > We have reached zero P1 regressions today and releases/gcc-10 branch has > been created; GCC 10.1-rc1 will be built and announced later tonight > or tomorrow. > The branch is now frozen for blocking regressions

Re: [RFC] add push/pop pragma to control the scope of "using"

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 3:15 AM 马江 wrote: > > Hello, > After some google, I find there is no way to control the scope of > "using" for the moment. This seems strange as we definitely need this > feature especially when writing inline member functions in c++ > headers. > > Currently I am

Re: Usage of C11 Annex K Bounds-checking interfaces on GCC

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 9:43 PM Liu Hao wrote: > > 在 2019/12/16 4:00, Jeffrey Walton 写道: > > > > If RTFM was going to work, then it would have happened in the last 50 > > years or so. > > > > If error free programming was going to happen, then it would have >

Re: Usage of C11 Annex K Bounds-checking interfaces on GCC

On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 1:25 PM David Brown wrote: > > On 15/12/2019 02:57, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 12:36 PM Martin Sebor wrote: > >> > >> On 12/9/19 8:15 PM, li zi wrote: > >>> Hi All, > >>> We are using g

Re: Usage of C11 Annex K Bounds-checking interfaces on GCC

On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 12:36 PM Martin Sebor wrote: > > On 12/9/19 8:15 PM, li zi wrote: > > Hi All, > > We are using gcc in our projects and we found some of the C standard > > functions (like memcpy, strcpy) used in gcc may induce security > > vulnerablities like buffer overflow. Currently

Re: Can LTO minor version be updated in backward compatible way ?

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 2:10 PM Jeff Law wrote: > > ... > SuSE's announcement today is quite ironic. Red Hat's toolchain team is > planning to propose switching to LTO by default for Fedora 32 and were > working through various details yesterday. Our proposal will almost > certainly include

Re: [RFC] -Weverything

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 1:35 PM Thomas Koenig wrote: > > What would people think about a -Weverything option which turns on > every warning there is? I tried to use -Weverything on a C++ project with about 350 source files. It was a failed experiment. It created too much noise to be useful.

Re: where can download gcc 4.8.5 from

On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 4:04 PM Andrew Brockinton wrote: > > please find where can download gcc 4.8.5 linux mint 19.1 > thank you for your time https://gcc.gnu.org/releases.html

Re: gcc-9-20181202 is now available

On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 5:41 PM wrote: > > Snapshot gcc-9-20181202 is now available on > ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/9-20181202/ > and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. GCC 9 on PowerPC is doing well. I was able to test on GCC110 and GCC112 from the

Re: Obsolete Solaris 10 support

On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 10:13 AM C Bergström wrote: > > Is there anyone in the *open* solaris or variant camp who may be impacted > by this? SOL10 gets deprecated and I doubt anyone will really cry fowl, but > can it negatively impact any of the similar open source projects that may > identify at

Re: GCC bugzilla is down

On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 4:31 AM, Martin Liška wrote: > > Please fix bugzilla: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ > > Can't connect to the database. > Error: Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket > '/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock' (2) > Is your database installed and up and running? > Do

Re: Where and how do I download and install a C/C++ compiler GCC for Windows 10?

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018 at 2:32 PM, Mauro Roberto Peña Gutiérrez wrote: > The IDE of Eclipse for C/C++ projects development asks me for a route to a > GCC compiler. > > Apparently ALL of the IDEs of Eclipse do NOT include an C/C++ compiler! > > Where do I download a

GCC 8, ppc64-le and problems with -fstack-protector-strong

Hi Everyone, We are tracking an issue on ppc64-le and GCC 8. We can duplicate it on GCC112 when using /opt/cfarm/gcc8-r257824 compiler. Also see https://github.com/weidai11/cryptopp/issues/588. We have the issue isolated, but its not really reduced yet. When '-O2 -fstack-protector-strong' is

Re: Please support Coroutines TS in C++

On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > On 10/16/2017 07:06 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> >> On 16 October 2017 at 08:25, Ramón García wrote: >>> >>> ping >> >> >> As previously stated, nobody is working on it. > > > Not because nobody cares, but because of lack

Re: gcc Bugzilla corrupt again?

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:51 AM, Andrew Roberts wrote: > I was adding a comment to bug: > > 81616 - Update -mtune=generic for the current Intel and AMD processors > > After clicking add comment it took me an an entirely different bug. > > I tried to add the comment again,

Re: [std-discussion] Is this union aliasing code well-defined?

On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Yubin Ruan wrote: > ... > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 01:41:55PM -0700, Myriachan wrote: >> This question that "supercat" posted on Stack Overflow ran into an >> interesting problem: >> >>

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

>>> For completeness, GCC has a wiki. But I still don't have an account to >>> make an occasional update; and I still don't know how to get an >>> account. I tried to get one in the past but the process was broken so >>> I gave up. >> >> 1) create an account >> 2) get your username added to the

Re: Exhaustive Instructions for Toolchain Generation

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Joseph Myers wrote: > There are over 25000 words of GCC installation documentation in > install.texi, and that's not even including e.g. libstdc++ configure > options documented elsewhere. Other toolchain components also have such >

Re: Infering that the condition of a for loop is initially true?

> I'm suggesting that with -DNDEBUG, assert(x) should let the compiler > assume that x is true, but without producing any code to evaluate it at > runtime. > > E.g, given > > void foo (size_t n) > { > size_t i; > assert (n < 17); > for (i = n; i < 17; i++) > { ... } > } I

Re: RFC: Improving GCC8 default option settings

> * Make -fomit-frame-pointer the default - various targets already do this at > higher optimization levels, but this could easily be done for all targets. > Frame pointers haven't been needed for debugging for decades, however if > there > are still good reasons to keep it enabled with -O0

Bounce GCC119 (was: [cfarm-admins] Extremely Slow Disk Access On GCC119)

Hi David, > The system was configured to maximize diskspace and flexibility. It > now is supporting six, separate VMs. The disk array was configured as > a single physical volume, mapped to a single logical volume, that then > is partitioned into virtual I/O devices mapped to the VMs, which

Re: Announcing ARM and AArch64 port maintainers.

On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote: > I'm pleased to announce that the steering committee has appointed > > - James Greenhalgh as a full maintainer for the AArch64 port > > and > > - Kyrylo Tkachov as a full maintainer for the ARM port. > >

Re: Power 8 in-core crypto not working as expected

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:38 AM, Segher Boessenkool <seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > Hi! > > On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 12:37:33AM -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: >> I have implementation for AES on Power 8 using GCC's built-ins. Its >> available for inspection and downlo

Re: Power 8 in-core crypto not working as expected

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 1:39 AM, R0b0t1 <r03...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 11:37 PM, Jeffrey Walton <noloa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Everyone, >> >> I'm on gcc rather than gcc-help because we need to talk with some GCC >> devs who c

Power 8 in-core crypto not working as expected

a look at things. Suggestions for our next steps would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, Jeffrey Walton == Here are the compiler versions. - GCC112 (Linux, little endian) $ gcc --version gcc (GCC) 4.8.5 20150623 (Red Hat 4.8.5-11) - GCC119 (AIX, big endian

Suppress warning for conversion prototype (that is present) (Bug 6144)

Hi All, I'm working on Apple, so I'm stuck with some ancient stuff. I'm trying to compile with -Wall -Wextra -Wconversion, and I'm catching a warning similar to http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38116. The 38116 bug defers to Bug 6144 (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6614).

Re: GCC Support of Function/Variable Attributes

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Andrew Pinski pins...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I'm having trouble compiling sources adorned with the aligned attribute under Clang 3.1. Clang claims its GCC 4.2.1 compatible

Re: GCC 4.8 and -Og

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 4:51 AM, Richard Biener richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 6:20 AM, Chung-Ju Wu jasonw...@gmail.com wrote: 2013/2/25 Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com: Hi All, I read the relase notes on GCC 4.8 (http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/changes.html) and -Og

GCC 4.8 and -Og

Hi All, I read the relase notes on GCC 4.8 (http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/changes.html) and -Og caught my eye (the bulleted item is below). From the description, it looks like the switch addresses three issues: (1) compilation time, (2) 'debugging experience', and (3) runtime performance. I'm not

Re: Question on Undefined Right Shifts

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor i...@google.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote: I've been using John Regehr's Integer Overflow Checker (IOC) on a few libraries. It is a Clang plug-in and can be found at http

C/C++ Option to Initialize Variables?

Hi All, http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/C-Dialect-Options.html#C-Dialect-Options Is there an option to initialize variables to known values in a C/C++ program? My use case is 'debug' builds and finding use of uninitialized values that get lucky by being 0 most of the time. For example: void

Re: C/C++ Option to Initialize Variables?

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 7:42 AM, Michael Veksler mveks...@tx.technion.ac.il wrote: On 02/18/2013 02:02 PM, Alec Teal wrote: On 18/02/13 11:40, Jeffrey Walton wrote: Hi All, http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/C-Dialect-Options.html#C-Dialect-Options Is there an option to initialize

Re: C/C++ Option to Initialize Variables?

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com wrote: On 18 February 2013 13:28, Jeffrey Walton wrote: The reason I went looking for the flag is someone asked about a crash on the OpenSSL mailing list. I knew it was due to an uninitialized field (but they did

Re: C/C++ Option to Initialize Variables?

On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Andrew Haley a...@redhat.com wrote: On 02/18/2013 03:07 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote: On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com wrote: On 18 February 2013 13:28, Jeffrey Walton wrote: What if the .BSS section was initialized

Re: Copyright assignment

On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 4:00 AM, Damian Rouson sourc...@rouson.net wrote: I'm interested in contributing to the gfortran compiler. Please send me any forms or instructions I need to follow regarding copyright assignment. http://www.fsf.org/volunteer They will send you some forms you need to

Re: How To Add a Sequence Point?

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:47 PM, David Brown david.br...@hesbynett.no wrote: On 03/02/13 02:10, Jeffrey Walton wrote: So, it looks like I don't understand sequence points. Please forgive my ignorance. What does C/C++ and GCC offer to ensure writes are complete before reads are performed

How To Add a Sequence Point?

Hi All, How do I add a sequence point in my C/C++ code? Googling brings up a lot of 'volatile' hits, but I believe that's an abuse of GCC's interpretation of volatile since I'm not working with memory mapped hardware or registers. Jeff

Re: How To Add a Sequence Point?

wrote: On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Jeffrey Walton noloa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, How do I add a sequence point in my C/C++ code? A semi-colon (end of the statement), a comma (but not as an argument separator though) are both sequence points. Thanks, Andrew Pinski Googling brings

Re: Integer Overflow/Wrap and GCC Optimizations

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Robert Dewar de...@adacore.com wrote: On 1/24/2013 10:02 AM, Jeffrey Walton wrote: What I am not clear about is when an operation is deemed undefined or implementation defined. The compiler is free to assume that no arithmetic operation on signed integers

Re: hard typdef - proposal - I know it's not in the standard

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Lawrence Crowl cr...@googlers.com wrote: On 1/24/13, Alec Teal a.t...@warwick.ac.uk wrote: ... If you want your feature in mainline gcc, you will need to convince the maintainers that the feature is valuable. Likewise, if you want your extension in the C++