From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30529 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2003 19:56:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 30514 invoked by uid 71); 3 Apr 2003 19:56:01 -0000 Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 19:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030403195601.30513.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: ljrittle@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Loren James Rittle Subject: Re: other/4957: #pragma pack(1) ... #pragma pack(4) does not restore the original alignment Reply-To: Loren James Rittle X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00112.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR other/4957; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Loren James Rittle To: igusarov@akella.com Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: other/4957: #pragma pack(1) ... #pragma pack(4) does not restore the original alignment Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 13:52:11 -0600 (CST) In article <3E89B05E.4070302@akella.com>, "Igor A. Goussarov" writes: > [...] And since the .i files are too big, I didn't had the patience to > reduce them to a pure bug-generating code. > I guess that it might be a very stupid coding mistake, but it is > unlikely... > Well, I don't insist on keeping this bug open if you feel it > shouldn't. I'll download the weekly snapshot of mainline gcc and try to > build it to see how it behaves. gcc web site warns that not all of the > snapshots might even build, can you suggest me which snapshot is working > enough to try my code with it? > Thanks again for your time! If you are working with FreeBSD, then most mainline snapshots should work fine for you. However, I see that we aren't making snapshots of mainline at the moment. Perhaps wait until after gcc 3.3 is released if you can easily obtain CVS mainline (which should work ~9/10 random updates just fine on FreeBSD). If this bug/issue can be seen with mainline, I will take an active interest in: fixing it, explaining it to someone that can, or explaining how the test case effectively violates ODR. Regards, Loren