From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15088 invoked by alias); 2 Sep 2009 09:23:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 15071 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Sep 2009 09:23:45 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-vw0-f178.google.com (HELO mail-vw0-f178.google.com) (209.85.212.178) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:23:38 +0000 Received: by vws8 with SMTP id 8so613145vws.14 for ; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 02:23:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.69.15 with SMTP id x15mr10457759vci.73.1251883415948; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 02:23:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4A9D8A4F.7040707@moene.org> References: <4A9D40C8.7080000@qnx.com> <4A9D8A4F.7040707@moene.org> Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:23:00 -0000 Message-ID: <84fc9c000909020223g749b27dcve873126b564bf4eb@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [lto] Reader-writer compatibility? From: Richard Guenther To: Toon Moene Cc: Diego Novillo , rmansfield@qnx.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-09/txt/msg00041.txt.bz2 On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:55 PM, Toon Moene wrote: > Diego Novillo wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 11:42, Ryan Mansfield wrote: > >>> Is it required that the same compiler that generated lto objects be used >>> to >>> read them? I've come across a couple ICEs with the current revision >>> reading >>> lto objects created by a slightly older version =A0but same configurati= on. >>> Is >>> this simply invalid usage of my part? >> >> It's likely. =A0How much drift between the two revisions? =A0Can you >> recreate the ICE if you write and read with the exact same revision? >> If so, please file a bug. > > Please add version checking. =A0gfortran's module files (extension .mod) = that > are generated from source files that contain MODULE ... END MODULE > constructs *now* contain version information. > > I still get occasionally beaten by picking up modules from 4.3 that don't > have this - you'll get all sorts of unintelligible error messages that ju= st > distract from what's really wrong. There is bytecode version information - we just didn't bother to bump it on the branch. Richard.