This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments
- From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 3 Sep 2009 10:25:52 -0000
- Subject: [Bug lto/41230] [LTO] Segfault using -flto with -fvar-tracking-assignments
- References: <bug-41230-11406@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #8 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-09-03 10:25 -------
Subject: Re: [LTO] Segfault using -flto with
-fvar-tracking-assignments
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009, rmansfield at qnx dot com wrote:
> ------- Comment #6 from rmansfield at qnx dot com 2009-09-02 22:50 -------
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > Note that in general you have to repeat all options on the link command line,
> > otherwise you are building with -O0 there.
>
> Yep, I realize that. I just came across this crash by accidentally leaving
> -fvar-tracking-assignments off the link line. Improper usage that cause
> crashes/ICEs are still worth PRs, right?
Yes. We're going to have more of these I guess and need to sort out a
general policy (we could for example error out on more "incompatible"
switch combinations - or silently enable switches).
Richard.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41230