Re: freeze exception for gcc-4.5 (i386, amd64 only)

[Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@madism.org>]

On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 02:05:25PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 23.08.2010 13:30, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> >On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 01:21:04PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> >>On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 04:05:32AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >>>On 21.08.2010 14:56, Julien Cristau wrote:
> >>>>On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 19:33:12 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Now, to be clear, what nice things would gcc-4.5 bring to our users?
> >>>>>There is a complete list here [0], but those ones are, in my opinion,
> >>>>>very nice:
> >>>>>  - The new link time optimiser.
> >>>>>  - Improved C++0x support.
> >>>>>  - Plugins support.
> >>>>>
> >>>>My understanding is that lto in 4.5 is not quite there yet.  Not that
> >>>>I've tried it or anything.
> >>>
> >>>I don't share your understanding. I tried it for some builds.
> >>
> >>I've tried it on the work repository, and lto ICEs the compiler. Plus I
> >>get 2 other independant ICEs that I've not had time to reduce (hence the
> >>lack of bug report yet).
> >
> >>Though this happens with the gcc-4.5 in unstable, I've not tried with
> >>the one from experimental yet.
> >
> >Okay, it's not strictly speaking an ICE but I get, even with the one from
> >experimental:
> >
> >qdb/qoutput-c.c:424:1: sorry, unimplemented: gimple bytecode streams do not support the optimization attribute
> 
> are the optimization flags both passed to the compiler and the linker?

I opened #594062 meaning that it's pretty minor. Though very fast one
trips on http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44802 which is
pretty serious for any kind of big enough build (as in using visibility
and commodity archives)

-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org