On Tue, 2024-07-16 at 14:36 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > Hi, > > On 2024-07-16 14:14, Andrey Rakhmatullin wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 12:46:01PM +0100, Phil Wyett wrote: > > > > > > Packages built for the i386 arch need to conform to the i386 > > > > > > baseline, > > > > > > which is currently i686. If a package contains a newer instruction > > > > > > it's a > > > > > > bug in that package and gcc is not the cause of it, the package is. > > > > > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=filezilla&arch=i386&ver=3.63.0-1%2Bdeb12u3&stamp=1704758683&raw=0 > > > > > > indeed contains at least one compile command with -msse4.1. > > > > [...] > > > > > Yeah, I have discovered that it is indeed a cause of the d/rules in > > > > > the > > > > > filezilla package. I blame having taken over it recently, and still > > > > > haven't learned the ins and outs of it. > > > > It'd also be good to document reasons for such workarounds next time. > > > > Both the changelog and the surrounding comments don't really tell you > > > > what to watch out for in a new gcc version. There's no bug reference > > > > (GCC or Debian bug) or example error message or a pointer to possible > > > > miscompilation. > > > The addition to 'debian/rules' was in response to the below. > > > > > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1053804 > > That bug report looks like the outcome of the "addition", not the > > reason > > for it. Did you mean > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1034195 ? > > Yeah it'd have been good if there had been a link to that. E.g. in the > changelog or as a comment in debian/rules. > > > The interactions in both bugs look very weird to me, especially when > > the > > same person proposes compiling software with SSE4.1 and then complains > > that it fails on older hardware, and the reason for closing the newer > > bug > > also looks weird to me. I think it should be reopened and bumped to RC. > > I'm a bit confused as to why Filezilla bundles an ancient version of > Putty. The official Putty code does compile *that specific unit*[1] with > -msse4.1 but there is also a gate in the code to only use the > accelerated path if cpuid signals support for the new instructions. As > far as I can see you added the flag to all source files in the putty/ > subtree, thus more compilation units will use the new instructions that > are not necessarily ready for it (i.e. have extensive checking logic > upfront). It's not entirely surprising that the compiler then finds more > efficient ways to do operations using the new instructions, which will > then fail execution with invalid opcode. > > I'm with Andrey that the bug should be reopened and RC'ed because this > is effectively producing a miscompilation on i386. > > Kind regards > Philipp Kern > > [1] > https://sources.debian.org/src/putty/0.81-2/crypto/CMakeLists.txt/?hl=88#L130 > (it checks for the capability and then adds a specific library just for > that source file if successful)
Hi, Reopening it and looking at it again is the way forward. I hope in conjunction with upstream where necessary this can resolved. Regards Phil -- "I play the game for the game’s own sake" Arthur Conan Doyle - The Adventure of the Bruce-Partington Plans -- Internet Relay Chat (IRC): kathenas Website: https://kathenas.org Instagram: https://instagram.com/kathenasorg/ Buy Me A Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/kathenasorg --
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
