From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id E386D3857340; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 21:37:45 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E386D3857340 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1718141865; bh=/3JrbusT39wu4NaLlZGIbhYBz3RR1xcZeDJhJ0Pa0sU=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=M/Kr3/QY4VQBcoVNMy3p4Xh7VqNlAvqv90kPe7e5hqqOnGxPQvoADTkNVjqLi5LHT A3EBElgqXamA/ru4UXv6hPyH0EuqCWgFJq3xQ1nCLXE3c0RtF0fkm/0el2kmO4i2CD drk5TyblKR9ZFqLRToQe0SIPXVUN6jTWDcgV68dg= From: "lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug pch/115312] [14/15 Regression] ICE when including a PCH via compiler option -include Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 21:37:45 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: pch X-Bugzilla-Version: 14.1.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 14.2 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D115312 --- Comment #3 from Lewis Hyatt --- (In reply to Brecht Sanders from comment #2) > I have made a native Windows MinGW-w64 build where the lines "gcc_assert > (!the_parser);" were commented out in file gcc/cp/parser.cc and got > confirmation this successfully works around the issue. Thanks! Do you mind please confirming, are you building it with the followi= ng downstream patch in place (which is not part of GCC itself as of now): https://github.com/msys2/MINGW-packages/blob/master/mingw-w64-gcc/0021-PR14= 940-Allow-a-PCH-to-be-mapped-to-a-different-addr.patch ? If so, it would be interesting if possible to confirm whether the assert still triggers without that patch.=