[Bug 1208736] New: GCC 13: xen package fails
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 Bug ID: 1208736 Summary: GCC 13: xen package fails Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Basesystem Assignee: screening-team-bugs@suse.de Reporter: martin.liska@suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de Found By: --- Blocker: --- Fails here: https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:Staging:G... due to a known issue: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106511 however, it's something GCC upstream won't fix. So please silent the warning which is known for a quite high false-positive rate. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 Martin Li��ka <martin.liska@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1201089 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 Martin Li��ka <martin.liska@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |carnold@suse.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736#c1 --- Comment #1 from Charles Arnold <carnold@suse.com> --- (In reply to Martin Li��ka from comment #0)
Fails here: https://build.opensuse.org/package/live_build_log/openSUSE:Factory:Staging: Gcc7/xen/standard/x86_64
due to a known issue: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106511
however, it's something GCC upstream won't fix. So please silent the warning which is known for a quite high false-positive rate.
Resolved this issue and also a later (and different) issue during compilation. SR#1068230 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736#c3 Martin Li��ka <martin.liska@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Martin Li��ka <martin.liska@suse.com> --- Thank you for it, thus fixed in devel project. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736#c4 --- Comment #4 from Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> --- The same issue ought to exist in Linux (where we got the code from, and where - purely from eyeballing - that code hasn't changed in the meantime). Was that reported somewhere as well? I ask because for properly addressing the issue we'd prefer to take whatever fix is going to appear in Linux (to limit divergence of our clone). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jbeulich@suse.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736#c5 --- Comment #5 from Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> --- Created attachment 865174 --> https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=865174&action=edit alternative workaround for the bunzip2 issue Charles, I think we would be better off using something like this than the CU-wide turning off of the warning. If later something else bubbles down from Linux, we would certainly want to switch over. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736#c6 --- Comment #6 from Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> --- Created attachment 865176 --> https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=865176&action=edit alternative workaround for the altp2m issues Charles, could you give this a try instead of suppressing the warning (effectively globally)? Note also the two TBDs in there, which would be helpful if you could address. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736#c7 --- Comment #7 from Martin Li��ka <martin.liska@suse.com> --- (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #4)
The same issue ought to exist in Linux (where we got the code from, and where - purely from eyeballing - that code hasn't changed in the meantime). Was that reported somewhere as well?
No. Note the warning is known for a high false-positive rate and I would not use -Werror=maybe-uninitialized. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208736#c8 --- Comment #8 from Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> --- (In reply to Martin Li��ka from comment #7)
No. Note the warning is known for a high false-positive rate and I would not use -Werror=maybe-uninitialized.
Oh, I see - they disable it by default, and re-enable it only with W=2. We don't enable that warning in Xen; we use the compiler's default and deal with the fallout (upstream). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply@suse.com