On 2019-10-28 23:34:11 +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> You like to make other people bad where this is not the case. In this
> case this is not a LO bug since the exact same LO version worked until
> said gcc upload.

If the LO code has some undefined behavior, it could also be a LO bug
triggered by some new optimization or other change in the compiler.

That said, when seeing a new failure with a new GCC version for MPFR,
in (almost) all cases, this was due to a bug in GCC (after I spent
some time to build a simple testcase). But note that I also test MPFR
with sanitizer options, so that if there is some UB in MPFR, I would
probably notice it first.

I notice that this bug is assigned to libstdc++6. Do you think that
it is a library issue rather than a compiler issue? If you build LO
with an older gcc-9 version, upgrade libstdc++6, and run the test
again (without rebuilding it), does it fail?

If this is due to the compilation step, I would suggest to check LO
with sanitizer options. I also notice that the logs show the that
-fno-enforce-eh-specs option is used, which might also hide issues,
I suppose.

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

Reply via email to