From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de [217.72.192.73]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A3D33857C7F for ; Thu, 13 May 2021 02:22:42 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 0A3D33857C7F Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=towo.net Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=towo@towo.net Received: from [192.168.178.74] ([91.65.218.78]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue109 [212.227.15.183]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MKKd7-1lwCCc27wt-00LoZP for ; Thu, 13 May 2021 04:22:41 +0200 Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Test: {mingw64-{i686,x86_64}-,}gcc-11.1.0-0.1 To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <0c2f908b-d3ac-5bd6-92b1-c2bd0970ec24@gmail.com> <7abf399d-1844-16da-ce49-afe442509ad3@towo.net> <20f80861-efa7-5f65-8d70-94fa7793812d@SystematicSw.ab.ca> From: Thomas Wolff Message-ID: <71c6c87a-1e5b-14c5-a85c-068fd22f2301@towo.net> Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 04:22:40 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20f80861-efa7-5f65-8d70-94fa7793812d@SystematicSw.ab.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:NzIx2ChFEc4hyZfbLBle1UqEFIRqRPUIWTCvAjFVEuR6jIdxVB9 CGB5A032sBeMEuY1fLS8RaTFcqM3b0WNtxcoUVG6itDbS0lx+hAuyxoBQSpLMjJZKSeg5Ls Elj2xnXqMUf87/3yCpNwYARLLv8+dmVuISzVaWKPRMfWYEFXS9VCl+IgXzCJ1NDYgL12G3u CjUXBbB/ZZYZG3ihzrQHg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:kL90tDdMlKA=:2gMBNGuqow+PRatygBFZWx CW9i7BHnrWd44d6sksrF3ZKfMATFK28cHGcnwdqOGBnZ3b2vL1DXcbMJnDpLUt0jc/X5qCkOp ijfNcvcq0X/S/PUMj+SpGNTANbuMOJ/VdccloFzY19nN8Z7EXKKBZDqBXHllv0uIcZr1TDGa5 dSi4BAbfg8BW1WQAUihqtDSn+A/+/Olmldg9PuwQF1xK+hmmFJLTl8eJF9+VtYWLZxfQae56Z hSYSR1vRHvUqNQ8hSMao1Nr8ufM4fVFlDTfE7CWN8fR1LxCH2Glfa/0HCM0/h4ji6qUPberlk YRd9JVX98LeP6tkC1N8X5P8J5QZC1ibqbbLz+uNKnVhHWsdHlv1LqpFmmLTNmtvySaJiBaLPI a+ODpgv5oKI/swJewYxS5Ni/51M9vKWI6q0XSJId5l87Xz6n/x2EB94G15HMTmw0KPRKDiqU4 DBFaeyRBBQnsiUqWzCXbC868T121xA8pVv+YQo2xGZi4SYzr7QGfOg9FWU8SErYeIINf1q38x Zf5F+47frEtW5D2kLDDAfo= X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY, KAM_NUMSUBJECT, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 May 2021 02:22:44 -0000 Am 13.05.2021 um 03:41 schrieb Brian Inglis: > > On 2021-05-12 12:30, Thomas Wolff wrote: >> Am 12.05.2021 um 12:42 schrieb Jonathan Yong via Cygwin: >>> On 5/12/21 9:14 AM, Thomas Wolff wrote: >>>> Am 10.05.2021 um 21:13 schrieb Achim Gratz: >>>>> The native and mingw-w64 cross compilers have been updated for both >>>>> architectures to the latest upstream release version: >>>>>   gcc-11.1.0-0.1 > >>>> Are there any known problems with gcc 11? My program crashes if >>>> compiled with gcc -O2; gcc -O1 works, gcc 10 also works. > Do you mean that building mintty with gcc 11 -O2 breaks mintty? No, this is actually about another program, my text editor mined (just migrating to github). > >>>>>   mingw64-i686-gcc-11.1.0-0.1 >>>>>   mingw64-x86_64-gcc-11.1.0-0.1 >>>>> >>>>> This test release includes libgccjit as a separate package for the >>>>> native toolchain on both architectures.  Since Cygwin can't use >>>>> ASLR any >>>>> nontrivial dynamic objects that get created in this way will >>>>> likely need >>>>> to get rebased before they can be used (especially on 32bit). It is >>>>> unlikely that build systems recognize the need for doing that at the >>>>> moment. >>>>> >>>>> Please test these compilers with your packages and applications as >>>>> extensively as possible (especially if you are a Cygwin package >>>>> maintainer).  Unless problems are found that necessitate another >>>>> round >>>>> of testing, the plan is to bootstrap the support libraries with >>>>> the new >>>>> toolchain and do a non-test update in about two to four weeks. > >>> Does stripping the optimized executable fix things? > >> No > >>> Are you also able to produce a minimal test case? > >> Hardly. Behaviour is totally erratic. If I let the stacktrace tell me >> where it crashed and make the function empty, it happens somewhere >> else...