Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 10:59:19 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: perl@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 210837] lang/perl5.22 (and related?): ext/re/re_exec.c has long long format matched up with long argument Message-ID: <bug-210837-14331-S74x8rirCG@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-210837-14331@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-210837-14331@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D210837 --- Comment #6 from Mark Millard <markmi@dsl-only.net> --- (In reply to Mathieu Arnold from comment #5) It is fixed upstream in v5.23.4 and later tags but it was fixed because it = is broken in v5.22 (and up until the fix) for some types of target architectur= es where long and the IVdf format do not match --and where long was too short = and IV was needed in the casts and IVdf was needed for both formats. Looks like I should possibly switch to v5.24 since I use TARGET_ARCH's for which v5.22 is broken here. (I'm not so sure that I'm likely to hit the bro= ken code.) It "works as intended" only in the sense of bug-for-bug 5.22 compatible sin= ce upstream is not updating things that old for such issues for targeting such architectures (no new 5.22.x tag that includes the fix). Too bad "Closed" does not have a "bug-for-bug compatible with upstream's version" as an option. None of the existing options for Closed are a good f= it for this specific defect. [In another environment I was in once there was a= "no plan to fix" option for closing things. It avoided being misleading about if there was an actual issue present and made finding such things easier.] I do think that "works as intended" is strongly misleading here: the compli= er's warning was not a false-positive. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-210837-14331-S74x8rirCG>