Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/3] pedantic errors in next

Hi Carlo,

Am 11.08.21 um 01:49 schrieb Carlo Arenas:

On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 12:30 PM René Scharfe [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Those are different issues and they should be addressed by separate patches,
I think.  That's why I submitted a patch for the second one in
http://public-inbox.org/git/bab9f889-ee2e-d3c3-0319-e297b59261a0@web.de/.

agree, and that is why I mentioned not to merge mine but use your
whole series instead when it is published (mine was just a stopgap to
see if I could get SANITIZE=undefined to behave meanwhile, but that I
thought would be worth making public so anyone else affected might
have something to start with)

would at least the two included in the chunks above be safe enough for
RC2 as I hope?, is the one with the additional int too hacky to be
considered for release?;

I think your -pedantic fixes 1 and 2 should go into the next possible
release candidate because they fix regressions.

Same for my signed-left-shift fix in
http://public-inbox.org/git/bab9f889-ee2e-d3c3-0319-e297b59261a0@web.de/
(or some improved version if it's lacking in some way) and the yet to be
published fix for the alignment issue.  I assume Andrzej as the reporter
or Eric as the original author would like to have a shot at the latter.

FWIW hadn't been able to reproduce that issue
you reported in t3301 even with an Apple M1 with macOS 11.5.1 (I use
NO_GETTEXT=1 though, not sure that might be why)

Strange.  I use Apple clang version 12.0.5 (clang-1205.0.22.11) on the
same OS.

At least the reproduction on Linux that you mentioned in your reply
means I can calm down a bit because it's not just a problem on my
system..

Thank you,
René