From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 9B16338708D1; Sat, 15 Jun 2024 15:30:46 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9B16338708D1
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1718465446;
	bh=SeUp9rHnMAO10xLeYsRhgbL4N7I6h7n9h2BFZel6nUA=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=CCUaAE+ToTAS1h70Xtj4iPgpRWf3ywgI4dvh8OI9MzwsHfv3+r2B9Fc3F0/1X5omw
	 CHFlVZ4Oc5twLMsJLwK20mtPMXY0TxOnEcZfF3LGCUIwD9v1PjrjdcOorJqeicT20q
	 XXDLkqiBCqom9C2FC3cSuQ6yJEZacQj+3WCmDYDk=
From: "lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.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: Sat, 15 Jun 2024 15:30:46 +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: <bug-115312-4-IWNRfLh85v@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-115312-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-115312-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D115312

--- Comment #5 from Lewis Hyatt <lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Brecht Sanders from comment #4)
> No, that patch wasn't added for my build, see my build recipe here:
> https://github.com/brechtsanders/winlibs_recipes/blob/main/recipes/gcc.wi=
nlib

Thanks, this script is useful. FWIW I think the patch is there, line 778?
Unless I am missing something.

I see you also commented out the assert in your recipe. I am still not sure=
 if
that is just masking some deeper issue, but I am getting close to being abl=
e to
reproduce it myself and will let you know.=