Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ecBkr-0001Rn-2a for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:05:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ecBkq-0001SS-Lb for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:05:24 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ecBkq-0001SI-Bq for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:05:24 +0000 Received: from mx.wagner.pp.ru ([2a01:4f8:c17:2e5b::2]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ecBki-0005p8-O8 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 15:05:23 +0000 Received: from fafnir.local.vm (unknown [93.174.131.141]) by mx.wagner.pp.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7C1FCE0047 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 2018 18:05:13 +0300 (MSK) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 18:05:12 +0300 From: Victor Wagner To: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: master make check fails on Solaris 10 Message-ID: <20180118180512.066098de@fafnir.local.vm> In-Reply-To: <16822.1516287408@sss.pgh.pa.us> References: <0d3a9fa264cebe1cb9966f37b7c06e86@postgrespro.ru> <20180111173938.jimybeayp2u5mmup@alap3.anarazel.de> <31a342fa6a025a8bdfc5b8b19c29d56d@postgrespro.ru> <1232.1515780057@sss.pgh.pa.us> <15299.1515867055@sss.pgh.pa.us> <18209.1516059711@sss.pgh.pa.us> <90ab676392c8f9c84431976147097cf0@postgrespro.ru> <17897.1516202926@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1c70bab595a37ffa3a7fafea29fa6f55@postgrespro.ru> <31743.1516206789@sss.pgh.pa.us> <0e183c12a68af526ebc03c5c26206c44@postgrespro.ru> <16822.1516287408@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 09:56:48 -0500 Tom Lane wrote: > Marina Polyakova writes: > > Applying your patch on commit > > f033462d8f77c40b7d6b33c5116e50118fb4699d and using the > > configuration command from [1], I got: checking for __int128... yes > > checking for __int128 alignment bug... broken > > ... > > And make check-world passes. Victor said that he used a much > > simpler configuration command, and I'm trying to figure out what's > > changed.. =20 >=20 > Weird. Maybe the gcc bug only manifests with certain optimization > flags? That's not what I'd have expected from Victor's theory about No. I've compiled test program without any optimizationf flags. Just -m64, which tells compiler to generate 64-bit code. (in 32-bit mode there is no __int128, so problem wouldn't manifest inself). =46rom the other side, when I've tried to resolve issue with not worked test, I've copied all gcc flags from config.log, and test program returned 1 with exactly same flags. Probably, I should have to regenerate configure with autoconf. instead of applying patch to configure. --=20