From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24148 invoked by alias); 1 Oct 2002 21:59:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 24140 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2002 21:59:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO Cantor.suse.de) (213.95.15.193) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Oct 2002 21:59:36 -0000 Received: from Hermes.suse.de (Charybdis.suse.de [213.95.15.201]) by Cantor.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB25314AF3; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 23:59:35 +0200 (MEST) Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2002 15:40:00 -0000 From: Michael Matz To: Joe Buck Cc: Subject: Re: module level flags In-Reply-To: <200210012114.OAA16417@atrus.synopsys.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00060.txt.bz2 Hi, On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Joe Buck wrote: > Can any folks from Red Hat or elsewhere comment on how many violations > they found when they first switched to compilers that implement > strict-aliasing by default? I can't comment on all of SuSE's packages, but at least we didn't run into _that_ many failures, or at least didn't noticed them yet (OTOH we went straight from 2.95.3 to 3.2, so some of them might have been fixed at that time already). But XFree86 (or at least some drivers of it) definitely violates aliasing rules, and IIRC an interpreter of a functional language (don't remember which, but it isn't an rpm on the distribution). A quick grep through all our .spec files and diffs over most of the current packages reveals for instance, that only sendmail and xf86 are compiled with no-strict-aliasing currently. The kernel of course too. Ciao, Michael.