> Wouldn't a better solution be to change tcc to clear the padding bytes, > which would also help it reproducibly build other software?
I do not know as I haven't tried it, but it might be a good direction. On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 10:48 PM Elijah Stone <elro...@elronnd.net> wrote: > On Thu, 11 Feb 2021, Ayush Varshney wrote: > > > What I wanted to discuss was in terms of reproducibility of tcc compiler > > > > *snip* > > > > The problem is that tcc’s “long double” uses only 10 bytes, but it is > > stored in 12 bytes, and tcc’s source code does not initialize the extra > > 2 bytes > > Wouldn't a better solution be to change tcc to clear the padding bytes, > which would also help it reproducibly build other software? > > -E_______________________________________________ > Tinycc-devel mailing list > Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel >
_______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
