Обсуждение: pgsql: Suppress uninitialized-variable warning.
Suppress uninitialized-variable warning. Branch ------ master Details ------- http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=b3cfcdaad27bea9bb86d6de6cbf8d184c16fbceb Modified Files -------------- src/bin/pg_basebackup/pg_basebackup.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
Which compiler did that come out of? I don't think I saw it on any of the ones I tried.. //Magnus On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 19:08, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Suppress uninitialized-variable warning. > > Branch > ------ > master > > Details > ------- > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=b3cfcdaad27bea9bb86d6de6cbf8d184c16fbceb > > Modified Files > -------------- > src/bin/pg_basebackup/pg_basebackup.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers > -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> Which compiler did that come out of? I don't think I saw it on any of
> the ones I tried..
gcc 4.4.5, standard on Fedora 13. I'm surprised that yours did not show
it, because the usage pattern looks beyond gcc's ability to prove safe.
regards, tom lane
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 19:21, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: >> Which compiler did that come out of? I don't think I saw it on any of >> the ones I tried.. > > gcc 4.4.5, standard on Fedora 13. I'm surprised that yours did not show > it, because the usage pattern looks beyond gcc's ability to prove safe. Interesting. I just make clean/make:ed it again to make sure, and it doesn't. And I'm on: gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.4.4-14ubuntu5) 4.4.5 -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 19:21, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>>> Which compiler did that come out of? I don't think I saw it on any of
>>> the ones I tried..
>> gcc 4.4.5, standard on Fedora 13. �I'm surprised that yours did not show
>> it, because the usage pattern looks beyond gcc's ability to prove safe.
> Interesting. I just make clean/make:ed it again to make sure, and it
> doesn't. And I'm on:
> gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.4.4-14ubuntu5) 4.4.5
[ scratches head... ] Maybe you are using different switches, perhaps
optimization higher than -O2?
But anyway, I think the project policy for such things is that we want
to suppress warnings when feasible on all common compilers, so the patch
is appropriate no matter what the specific reason for the difference is.
regards, tom lane
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 19:36, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: >> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 19:21, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes: >>>> Which compiler did that come out of? I don't think I saw it on any of >>>> the ones I tried.. > >>> gcc 4.4.5, standard on Fedora 13. I'm surprised that yours did not show >>> it, because the usage pattern looks beyond gcc's ability to prove safe. > >> Interesting. I just make clean/make:ed it again to make sure, and it >> doesn't. And I'm on: >> gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.4.4-14ubuntu5) 4.4.5 > > [ scratches head... ] Maybe you are using different switches, perhaps > optimization higher than -O2? Nope... gcc -O2 -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wendif-labels -fno-strict-aliasing -fwrapv -g -I../../../src/interfaces/libpq -I../../../src/include -D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o pg_basebackup.o pg_basebackup.c -MMD -MP -MF .deps/pg_basebackup.Po gives no output at all. > But anyway, I think the project policy for such things is that we want > to suppress warnings when feasible on all common compilers, so the patch > is appropriate no matter what the specific reason for the difference is. Oh yes, I totally agree. I'm just trying to figure out why I didn't see it myself. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 13:36 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> gcc 4.4.5, standard on Fedora 13. I'm surprised that yours did not > show > >> it, because the usage pattern looks beyond gcc's ability to prove > safe. > > > Interesting. I just make clean/make:ed it again to make sure, and it > > doesn't. And I'm on: > > gcc (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.4.4-14ubuntu5) 4.4.5 > > [ scratches head... ] Maybe you are using different switches, perhaps > optimization higher than -O2? Maybe there is a Fedora specific patch that causes this issue? -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer PostgreSQL RPM Repository: http://yum.pgrpms.org Community: devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr http://www.gunduz.org Twitter: http://twitter.com/devrimgunduz