On 09/26/2014 05:57 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
/aux/hubicka/libreoffice2/50-lto/workdir/UnpackedTarball/boost/boost/unordered/unordered_set.hpp:711:24:
error: variadic templates only available with -std=c++11 or -std=gnu++11
template class... Args
^
Ah, right, good catch. Our XLIB_* trick from
include/{pre,post}x.h (which had been duplicated in
extensions/source/plugin/inc/plugin/unx/plugcon.hxx prior to
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=15c609f33da44c24e1d0cf19670b0da43738ce0c
Use prex.h/postx.h). Should go
On 09/22/2014 08:32 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
On 09/20/2014 04:39 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
/usr/include/X11/Xlib.h:948:3: warning: type ‘struct XAnyEvent’ violates one
definition rule [-Wodr]
} XAnyEvent;
^
/usr/include/X11/Xlib.h:948:3: note: a different type is defined in another
Our Window class has now been moved into the vcl namespace, so that should resolve the conflict with the Window type in
the X11 headers.
Disclaimer: http://www.peralex.com/disclaimer.html
___
LibreOffice mailing list
Hi Honza,
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 04:39:05AM +0200, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
/aux/hubicka/libreoffice2/core/sw/source/core/inc/rootfrm.hxx:54:0: warning:
type ‘struct SwRootFrm’ violates one definition rule [-Wodr]
class SwRootFrm: public SwLayoutFrm
^
On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 04:39 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
/aux/hubicka/libreoffice2/core/sw/source/core/inc/rootfrm.hxx:54:0: warning:
type ‘struct SwRootFrm’ violates one definition rule [-Wodr]
class SwRootFrm: public SwLayoutFrm
^
On 09/20/2014 04:39 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
/usr/include/X11/Xlib.h:948:3: warning: type ‘struct XAnyEvent’ violates one
definition rule [-Wodr]
} XAnyEvent;
^
/usr/include/X11/Xlib.h:948:3: note: a different type is defined in another
translation unit
} XAnyEvent;
^
On 09/20/2014 04:39 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
/usr/include/X11/Xlib.h:948:3: warning: type ‘struct XAnyEvent’ violates one
definition rule [-Wodr]
} XAnyEvent;
^
/usr/include/X11/Xlib.h:948:3: note: a different type is defined in another
translation unit
} XAnyEvent;
^
On 09/13/2014 05:43 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
I updated to current tree and my ODR checker reports no more violations
during of libmergedlo.
Did you integrated more stuff to it?
I at least didn't address any further issues from your list than the
ones I'd reported as fixed.
Iant fixed the
On 09/13/2014 05:43 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
I updated to current tree and my ODR checker reports no more violations during
of libmergedlo.
Did you integrated more stuff to it?
I at least didn't address any further issues from your list than the
ones I'd reported as fixed.
Stephan
On 13 September 2014 17:43, Jan Hubicka hubi...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi,
I updated to current tree and my ODR checker reports no more violations
during of libmergedlo.
Did you integrated more stuff to it? It seems to be significantly bigger than
one I tested in
April (so it now hits limit on
Hi,
I updated to current tree and my ODR checker reports no more violations during
of libmergedlo.
Did you integrated more stuff to it? It seems to be significantly bigger than
one I tested in
April (so it now hits limit on number of sections in ELF library used by GCC,
hopefully that
will be
On 09/11/2014 08:27 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
On 09/11/2014 07:05 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Anyway those are warning I currently get with ODR type merging. The first
three are
quite puzzling - the type layout differs, but by abstract field so I am unable
to print
out any resonable message. This
Completely different. ;)
Hehe, probably good enough for my comparing code to panic and run away ;)
While the hand-written class in
i18npool/inc/nativenumbersupplier.hxx has member variables (direct
ones as well as ones inherited from the base class template
instantiation) along with
On 09/11/2014 07:05 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Anyway those are warning I currently get with ODR type merging. The first
three are
quite puzzling - the type layout differs, but by abstract field so I am unable
to print
out any resonable message. This may suggest difference in virtual inheritance
On 09/11/2014 07:05 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
/aux/hubicka/libreoffice/i18npool/inc/transliteration_Ignore.hxx:36:7: warning:
type ‘struct transliteration_Ignore’ violates one definition rule [-Wodr]
class transliteration_Ignore : public transliteration_commonclass
^
On 09/11/2014 07:05 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Anyway those are warning I currently get with ODR type merging. The first
three are
quite puzzling - the type layout differs, but by abstract field so I am
unable to print
out any resonable message. This may suggest difference in virtual
On 10/09/14 07:45, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Yep, I am curious too. I just got my trees updated after vacation so
hopefully
I will get there soon (for sure libreoffice will trigger few GCC bugs first)
yes we do have a certain reputation for that...thanks to Miklos now you
can even get the t-shirt
On 10/09/14 07:45, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Yep, I am curious too. I just got my trees updated after vacation so
hopefully
I will get there soon (for sure libreoffice will trigger few GCC bugs first)
yes we do have a certain reputation for that...thanks to Miklos now you
can even get the
Hello,
I finally had chance to put the data together:
http://hubicka.blogspot.ca/2014/09/linktime-optimization-in-gcc-part-3.html
any comments are welcome.
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 09:06:24PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Another one I noticed :)
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 01:20:28AM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 09:06:24PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Another one I noticed :)
/aux/hubicka/libreoffice/connectivity/source/inc/dbase/DIndex.hxx:41:15:
warning: type �struct ODbaseIndex� violates one definition rule
Here's the struct:
struct NDXHeader
{
sal_uInt32 db_rootpage;/* Rootpage position
*/
sal_uInt32 db_pagecount; /* Page count
*/
sal_uInt8 db_frei[4]; /* Reserved
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 09:06:24PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
Another one I noticed :)
/aux/hubicka/libreoffice/connectivity/source/inc/dbase/DIndex.hxx:41:15:
warning: type �struct ODbaseIndex� violates one definition rule [-Wodr]
class ODbaseIndex : public ODbaseIndex_BASE
Hi Matus,
Any chance you can fix / commit this one ? :-)
Jan - wow - that is a nice error =) are there any other ODR issues ?
they habitually bite us hard so ... great to get libmerged debugged even
more. CC'ing the list too.
Thanks !
Michael.
On Fri,
Hi Matus,
Any chance you can fix / commit this one ? :-)
Jan - wow - that is a nice error =) are there any other ODR issues ?
they habitually bite us hard so ... great to get libmerged debugged even
more. CC'ing the list too.
Another one I noticed :)
Hi Matus,
Any chance you can fix / commit this one ? :-)
Jan - wow - that is a nice error =) are there any other ODR issues ?
they habitually bite us hard so ... great to get libmerged debugged even
more. CC'ing the list too.
I have patch in way for type virtual tables ODR
26 matches
Mail list logo
