Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 15 Mar 2009 09:12:40 +0100
From:      Roman Divacky <rdivacky@FreeBSD.org>
To:        David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r189824 - in head/contrib/gcc: . doc
Message-ID:  <20090315081240.GB39715@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <200903141936.n2EJaDM5006130@svn.freebsd.org>
References:  <200903141936.n2EJaDM5006130@svn.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 07:36:13PM +0000, David Schultz wrote:
> Author: das
> Date: Sat Mar 14 19:36:13 2009
> New Revision: 189824
> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/189824
> 
> Log:
>   Make gcc use C99 inline semantics in c99 and gnu99 mode.  This was the
>   original intent, but the functionality wasn't implemented until after
>   gcc 4.2 was released. However, if you compiled a program that would
>   behave differently before and after this change, gcc 4.2 would have
>   warned you; hence, everything currently in the base system is
>   unaffected by this change.  This patch also adds additional warnings
>   about certain inline function-related bogosity, e.g., using a
>   static non-const local variable in an inline function.
>   
>   These changes were merged from a snapshot of gcc mainline from March
>   2007, prior to the GPLv3 switch. I then ran the regression test suite
>   from a more recent gcc snapshot and fixed the important bugs it found.
>   I also squelched the following warning unless -pedantic is specified:
>   
>       foo is static but used in inline function bar which is not static
>   
>   This is consistent with LLVM's behavior, but not consistent with gcc 4.3.

thnx a lot for doing this! just a quick question - what is the fallback
strategy for ports that will die on this?

roman



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090315081240.GB39715>