Re: Build failure with GCC 15 (defaults to -std=gnu23)
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Build failure with GCC 15 (defaults to -std=gnu23) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+hUKGL0LWK7hVO9r2eb3hFDBptZByOkAKGAjXKJ5mqd9hs_fA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Build failure with GCC 15 (defaults to -std=gnu23) (Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Build failure with GCC 15 (defaults to -std=gnu23)
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 4:57 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote: > Where does this leave us regarding backpatching the other two > C23-related patches? The node tree walker issue looks like a very hard > barrier. I don't want to spend too much effort backpatching anything to > ancient version if there's little hope of getting the whole thing working. Oh. Yeah. 1c27d16e6e5 was not back-patchable. And what f9a56e72 did in 15 and older doesn't seem to have any equivalent in C23, at least without going way overboard. -Wdeprecated-non-prototype was recognising a category of function type that no longer exists, so the code now falls into the more general case of -Wincompatible-pointer-types in C23, which you certainly wouldn't want to suppress. So perhaps we actually can't make any branch older than PostgreSQL 16 into a valid C23 program, and if that's true, I needn't have back-patched the <stdbool.h> change any further back than 16. Perhaps we should reconsider that, then. And if it can't be all the back-branches, we could even decide to focus just on master. Where do we want our C23 support to begin? Coincidental observation: We added -Wdeprecated-non-prototype back when Clang 15 invented it, but I noticed that GCC 15 has just now added it too[1], so alligator started detecting and using that in REL_15_STABLE last week. Of course it doesn't help once you're talking C23. [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=gcc.git;h=701d8e7e60b85809cae348c1e9edb3b0f4924325 [2] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=alligator&dt=2024-11-18%2019%3A23%3A30&stg=configure
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: