* [Bug libstdc++/44679] [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5)
2010-06-26 10:19 [Bug libstdc++/44679] New: [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5) doko at ubuntu dot com
@ 2010-06-26 11:27 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2010-06-26 14:01 ` redi at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2010-06-26 11:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-26 11:27 -------
Jon, can you have a quick look to this? Thanks in advance
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |redi at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44679
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/44679] [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5)
2010-06-26 10:19 [Bug libstdc++/44679] New: [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5) doko at ubuntu dot com
2010-06-26 11:27 ` [Bug libstdc++/44679] " paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2010-06-26 14:01 ` redi at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-26 14:51 ` redi at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-06-26 14:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-26 14:01 -------
condition_variable_any was completely broken in 4.4 and its ABi changed when we
implemented it for real. Obviously we can't preserve ABI between a broken,
incomplete implementation and a working one, so I'm not really worried about
this "bug". If anyone was able to use the condition_variable_any in 4.4 I'd
like to know how they did it!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44679
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/44679] [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5)
2010-06-26 10:19 [Bug libstdc++/44679] New: [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5) doko at ubuntu dot com
2010-06-26 11:27 ` [Bug libstdc++/44679] " paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2010-06-26 14:01 ` redi at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-06-26 14:51 ` redi at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-28 16:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-06-26 14:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-26 14:51 -------
closing for the reasons given above
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44679
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/44679] [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5)
2010-06-26 10:19 [Bug libstdc++/44679] New: [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5) doko at ubuntu dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-06-26 14:51 ` redi at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-06-28 16:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-06-28 16:13 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2010-06-28 16:14 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-06-28 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-28 16:03 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> condition_variable_any was completely broken in 4.4 and its ABi changed when we
> implemented it for real. Obviously we can't preserve ABI between a broken,
> incomplete implementation and a working one, so I'm not really worried about
> this "bug". If anyone was able to use the condition_variable_any in 4.4 I'd
> like to know how they did it!
We should avoid exporting symbols for something that is broken or supposed
to change its ABI. I think this is what was done in the past, why wasn't
it done here?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44679
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/44679] [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5)
2010-06-26 10:19 [Bug libstdc++/44679] New: [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5) doko at ubuntu dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2010-06-28 16:03 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-06-28 16:13 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
2010-06-28 16:14 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2010-06-28 16:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-28 16:12 -------
A (small) mistake? I think the hope at the time was that Chris Fairles would
soon contribute the rest of the work and the complete facility shipped the next
major release series. That didn't happen, unfortunately, and instead of
reverting all the first changes, we shipped just very few unusable bits, among
which a couple exported. Finally, 4.6 will be fine.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44679
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/44679] [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5)
2010-06-26 10:19 [Bug libstdc++/44679] New: [4.5/4.6 regression] 30_threads/condition_variable_any/cons/1.cc fails with -fstack-protector (built with 4.4, run with 4.5) doko at ubuntu dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2010-06-28 16:13 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
@ 2010-06-28 16:14 ` paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com @ 2010-06-28 16:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-06-28 16:14 -------
Actually 4.5 is fine too ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44679
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread