Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 20:58:21 +0100 From: David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> To: Michael Butler <imb@protected-networks.net> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: gcc compilation broken with SVN r264042 Message-ID: <307BA2CF-E02A-4D82-B9E5-23AECAEA89DC@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <533C6ABE.2000801@protected-networks.net> References: <533C61B8.7060809@protected-networks.net> <509CAA08-8F00-4ED8-81FF-A51F1ECDC15C@FreeBSD.org> <533C6ABE.2000801@protected-networks.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2 Apr 2014, at 20:53, Michael Butler <imb@protected-networks.net> = wrote: > cc (GCC) 4.2.1 20070831 patched [FreeBSD] >=20 > .. on .. >=20 > FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #22 r263969: Mon Mar 31 10:45:56 EDT 2014 >=20 > Splitting it like .. >=20 > - fn.fn_ptr.cxa_func =3D = (void(*)(void*))GET_BLOCK_FUNCTION(func); > + fn.fn_ptr.cxa_func =3D > + (void(*)(void*)) > + GET_BLOCK_FUNCTION(func); >=20 > .. causes the reported error to point at the GET_BLOCK_FUNCTION. Sorry, I meant split it into different statements. Along the lines of: struct generic_block *b =3D (struct generic_block*)func; void (*fn)(void*,...) =3D b->invoke; fn.fn_ptr.cxa_func =3D (void (*)(void*))fn; > I guess it's time for me to migrate that box to clang :-) Well, I wouldn't object to that, but it would be good to fix this - we = still want to be able to build the base system with gcc (or another = compiler), even if we don't encourage it... David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?307BA2CF-E02A-4D82-B9E5-23AECAEA89DC>