Re: Should GCC emit the same code for compilation with '-g' and without '-g'

2018-05-01 Thread Jakub Jelinek
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 12:53:45PM -0700, Chengnian Sun wrote: > Does gcc have a requirement about the impact of emitting debug info on the > generated code? Should the code be the same no matter whether '-g' is > specified? Yes (except for selective scheduling, but that warns if you combine -fsel

Should GCC emit the same code for compilation with '-g' and without '-g'

2018-05-01 Thread Chengnian Sun
Hi, Does gcc have a requirement about the impact of emitting debug info on the generated code? Should the code be the same no matter whether '-g' is specified? Thank you. -- Best Regards. Chengnian

Re: Second GCC 8.1 Release Candidate available from gcc.gnu.org

2018-05-01 Thread Freddie Chopin
On Fri, 2018-04-27 at 23:39 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > The second release candidate for GCC 8.1 is available from > > ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/8.0.1-RC-20180427 > > and shortly its mirrors. It has been generated from SVN revision > 259731. > > I have so far bootstrapped and teste

Re: Stack protector: leak of guard's address on stack

2018-05-01 Thread Florian Weimer
* Maxim Kuvyrkov: > The problem is fairly target-dependent, so architecture maintainers > need to look at how stack-guard canaries and their addresses are > handled and whether they can be spilled onto stack. > > It appears we need to poll architecture maintainers before filing the CVE. One CVE I

Re: Stack protector: leak of guard's address on stack

2018-05-01 Thread Maxim Kuvyrkov
> On Apr 29, 2018, at 2:11 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Maxim Kuvyrkov: > >>> On Apr 28, 2018, at 9:22 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> >>> * Thomas Preudhomme: >>> Yes absolutely, CSE needs to be avoided. I made memory access volatile because the change was easier to do. Also on Ar

Re: gcc 8.0.1 RC documentation broken

2018-05-01 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 1 May 2018 at 05:42, Andrew Roberts wrote: > I filed this under 'web' as I couldn't see any documentation component. It > doesn't appear to have been looked at, There's a "documentation" keyword instead, but I'm often not sure which component doc bugs should be filed under.

Re: "position independent" vs "position-independent" in documentation

2018-05-01 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 30/04/18 22:12 -0600, Sandra Loosemore wrote: On 04/30/2018 05:56 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Should we standardize on "position-independent" and add it to https://gcc.gnu.org/codingconventions.html#Spelling ? The same generic English usage rules apply here as to other compound phrases; hyp

Re: Broken links in INSTALL/specific.html

2018-05-01 Thread Andrew Roberts
The reason I was looking at the versions in the RC tarball was that I have never been clear as to what release the website install/prerequisite/target info actually applies to. It would be much better if this info was on a per release basis on the web site, like the changelog and manuals. Thus a

Fast and Unlimited Satellite Internet Subscription

2018-05-01 Thread ICCSAT
http://iccsat.com?&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=vsat_satellite_service_data_voice_internet&utm_term=2017-10-31 ** ICCSAT (http://www.iccsat.com?&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=vsat_satellite_service_data_voice_internet&utm_term=2017-10-31)

Broken links in INSTALL/specific.html

2018-05-01 Thread Jakub Jelinek
Hi! PR web/85578 complains about broken links in INSTALL/specific.html inside of the rc tarballs, I've looked at past releases and at least the releases I've checked (4.7.0, 6.1, 7.1, 7.3, 8.1rc2) all have the broken links, e.g. aarch64*-*-* and aarch64*-*-* Looking at online docs, they are ok.