On 19 November 2012 07:20, Brendan Jones <brendan.jones.it(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/17/2012 09:42 AM, Ian Malone wrote:
>
> On 17 November 2012 03:09, Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fedora(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15 November 2012 23:20, Ian Malone wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 15 November 2012 04:40, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> A few months ago earlier in the F-17 release cycle, we had a problem
>>>>> with jackd turning verbose, flooding the stdout, even when its
>>>>> verbosity was turned off. This was a bug [1] in the compiler,
>>>>> specifically in the optimized builds, for which we filed a bug
against
>>>>> upstream gcc [2]. As a workaround we rebuilt jack unoptimized, and
we
>>>>> have been using the unoptimized build since.
>>>>>
>>>>> Late in September the issue got resolved in upstream gcc (see [2]).
>>>
>>>
>>>>> [1]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=827748
>>>>> [2]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53663
>>>>> [3]
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=362840
>>>>> [4]
http://oget.fedorapeople.org/jack/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Further the test in
>>>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53663#c3
>>> still fails on gcc-4.7.2-8.fc18.x86_64 for me (at -O1).
>>>
>>> You weren't running a patched gcc or something?
>>>
>>
>> No, it is the official gcc-4.7.2-2.fc17. You can see tho root.log in
>> the above link [4] for my buildroot.
>>
>
> One build is -9.1 and the other is -10, jack-realtime-compat.patch
> differs between the two. If its a compiler optimisation problem then
> the difference in initial variables may be causing a difference in
> behaviour? Just random speculation, on the basis that if the build
> systems are the same then something else must be the cause. Preferable
> to get the gcc fix though.
>
Yes verbose for 1.9.8-12, no verbose for 1.9.8-11. For F17 I tried
swapping back to the previous realtime-compat.patch and rebuilding
1.9.8-10 and it doesn't do verbose, so I think that does explain what
Orcan was seeing, though of course not actually a fix. Maybe need to
go back to a -O0 build before F18 release if the gcc fix isn't going
to be applied in time.
--
imalone