GNU bug report logs - #75846
31.0.50; feature/igc pgtk build crash on Linux/wayland (kde plasma6)

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Eval EXEC <execvy <at> gmail.com>

Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2025 02:43:01 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 31.0.50

Done: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
Cc: execvy <at> gmail.com, 75846 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#75846: 31.0.50; feature/igc pgtk build crash on Linux/wayland (kde plasma6)
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2025 12:29:52 +0200
> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2025 10:08:55 +0000
> From: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
> Cc: execvy <at> gmail.com, 75846 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > I wonder if we want to support -O3 compilations at all, let alone
> 
> I'm not sure what you are suggesting.  We don't enable -O3 by default or
> handle it in any special way.  I don't see how we could do so without
> losing valuable debug information for both us and the GCC project.

I meant to reject -O3 when specified via CFLAGS.

> > GCC is likely to produce buggy code with these options.
> 
> Not my experience.

You are lucky, then.

> It's a good way to get an early heads-up on proposed
> GCC optimizations which break our (undocumented) conservative GC
> assumptions.

I'm talking about general user population, not about someone who wants
to explore GCC generated code and/or debug GCC itself.

> Merely because that is relevant to that question, which I fear will have
> to be discussed in detail in other forums:
> 
> I've currently checked out the commit before 67e60210577 and haven't
> even decided whether I'll even *pull* feature/igc changes starting with
> 67e60210577, nevermind whether I want to *push* any further changes to
> feature/igc after that.
> 
> Depending on that decision of mine, you might want to ignore anything I
> recommend should or should not happen on that branch; that wouldn't
> change much, but it would save some time.

Commit 67e60210577 changes a single comment to describe how we use a
single macro, so I'm really bewildered by the above.  I must be
missing something.




This bug report was last modified 149 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.