https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92267
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Romain Geissler from comment #8) > Sorry to jump back into this old bug, but isn't it a issue that this was > backported to gcc 9 after some releases of gcc 9 were in the wild yet ? Yes. The choice was to accept a break and say "starting with GCC 9 there's an ABI break, nothing before 9 is compatible with anything after that" or to consider 9.1.0 and 9.2.0 to be buggy and fix the mistake for 9.3.0. > I mean, someone having built some binaries with gcc 9.1.0 or 9.2.0, mixing > it later with a binary built with the upcoming gcc 9.3.0 will also see a > similar crash, no ? I think (but I am not sure yet) this is actually > happening to me (although I am not using gcc releases, but directly compile > from git from gcc-9-branch, so I understand my right to complain is low, if > not non legit at all). What is advocated in this case, that all binaries > build with gcc 9.1.0 or 9.2.0 shall be rebuilt as well ? Or is there any way > that somehow the gcc 9 branch (and not gcc 10 one) can support both ABIs to > cope with past mistakes ? I'm not aware of any way to make that work. Once GCC 9.3.0 is released the solution is to upgrade to 9.3.0 and consider 9.1.0 and 9.2.0 to have a bug. If that bug affects you, you'll need to rebuild code built with those versions.
