From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OQN1o-0007ek-8j for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:05:48 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AD078E09D4; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:05:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B0A5E0A99 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:05:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 069401B405B for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:05:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.107 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.107 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.508, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j6r-hl7M5qa1 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:05:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D9111B4071 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 16:05:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OQN1M-0003CB-OL for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:05:20 +0200 Received: from liten.csbnet.se ([95.80.45.96]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:05:20 +0200 Received: from xake by liten.csbnet.se with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:05:20 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org connect(): No such file or directory From: Peter Hjalmarsson Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/traits: traits-3.4.0.ebuild Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:05:08 +0200 Message-ID: <1277049908.22112.16.camel@lillen> References: <20100610191934.39FEA2CAD8@corvid.gentoo.org> <201006102245.30298.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <201006191653.38750.vapier@gentoo.org> <201006201556.14340.Arfrever@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: liten.csbnet.se In-Reply-To: <201006201556.14340.Arfrever@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.1.2 X-Archives-Salt: 488c94b8-483b-4aec-8215-0f1ad7f14be6 X-Archives-Hash: 688a830b69f92a9233c5af73a3db6ad6 s=C3=B6n 2010-06-20 klockan 15:55 +0200 skrev Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis: >=20 > This problem is probably caused by bugs in Python 2, which have been fixe= d in Python 3. >=20 > $ echo 'a =3D True' > test.pyx > $ cython test.pyx > $ gcc -O2 -Wall -I/usr/include/python3.1 -c test.c > $ gcc -O2 -Wall -I/usr/include/python2.6 -c test.c > test.c: In function =E2=80=98inittest=E2=80=99: > test.c:479: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-= aliasing rules > test.c:479: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-= aliasing rules > test.c:479: warning: dereferencing pointer =E2=80=98_Py_TrueStruct.42=E2= =80=99 does break strict-aliasing rules > test.c:479: warning: dereferencing pointer =E2=80=98_Py_TrueStruct.42=E2= =80=99 does break strict-aliasing rules > test.c:479: note: initialized from here > test.c:482: warning: dereferencing pointer =E2=80=98__pyx_t_1=E2=80=99 do= es break strict-aliasing rules > test.c:482: warning: dereferencing pointer =E2=80=98__pyx_t_1=E2=80=99 do= es break strict-aliasing rules > test.c:482: warning: dereferencing pointer =E2=80=98__pyx_t_1=E2=80=99 do= es break strict-aliasing rules > test.c:482: warning: dereferencing pointer =E2=80=98__pyx_t_1=E2=80=99 do= es break strict-aliasing rules > test.c:479: note: initialized from here >=20 Actually this makes me question the append-flag even more. Why mess with what gcc does with the code for all versions of python if it works for x version of python? And "only" for som warnings? I could have understand a bit more if it was Errors. Also why not even a comment saying? Currently as one of the users of hardened and helping Zorry out with the hardened toolchain I have seen many packages filter flags like -fPIE and -fstack-protector without a comment on why, where and how it broke, and noone remeber why. New versions comes of software and if you do not know why it broke with a cflag you cannot test if the breakage is still there. This line of code is fine and all that until you forget why you added that flag or you retire and a later maintainer of the package does not dare to touch the flag since they do not know why it was added and what will break if the remove that line of ebuild code.