LinuxQuestions.org - [SOLVED] test-tgmath2.c exceeds variable tracking size limit -- glibc bug-14729

- Linux - Software (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/)

- - test-tgmath2.c exceeds variable tracking size limit -- glibc bug-14729 (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/test-tgmath2-c-exceeds-variable-tracking-size-limit-glibc-bug-14729-a-4175550766/)

test-tgmath2.c exceeds variable tracking size limit -- glibc bug-14729

From https://sourceware.org/bugzilla

Quote:

Markus Trippelsdorf 2012-10-16 15:01:51 UTC
With gcc-4.8 I get (after 1:40 minutes):

test-tgmath2.c: In function ‘test’:
test-tgmath2.c:93:1: note: variable tracking size limit exceeded with -fvar-tracking-assignments, retrying without
test (const int Vint4, const long long int Vllong4)
^
test-tgmath2.c:93:1: note: variable tracking size limit exceeded

(gcc-4.6 and gcc-4.7 compile quicker, but the error is the same)
.
.
.
Comment 1 joseph@codesourcery.com 2012-10-16 15:14:39 UTC
Patches should go to libc-alpha.
.
.
.
Comment 2 Markus Trippelsdorf 2012-11-21 18:11:36 UTC
Closing as wontfix.

OUCH! :doh:

Has anyone else run into this while trying to compile a hardened glibc? I'm using gcc-4.5.3 but from the comments in the bug report, newer compilers run into the same problem.

Both ./configure and make executed with clean error logs, but I'm hesitant to install something major with a failed make check report.

How critical is this test, given that the bug has been sitting unresolved for 2 plus years?

Regards,
James Rasmussen

I don't know anything about this, but did you see the discussion here?

I saw it. That was the patch Markus Trippelsdorf initially proposed, before saying "Doesn't Fix" a month later and summarily closing the bug. The fallback position for gcc is to do what Markus proposed anyway, then exit with a Type 2 error if the test fails with -fvar disabled. That may be why he threw in the towel.

I have no problem with that, but I wish someone would've then flagged it as trivial (if that's the case) or better yet, dropped the test from the glibc entirely. Now I have to harangue the good people at LQ about whether or not my glibc build is hosed.

Regards,
James Rasmussen

Ok, no replies since 08-14-2015 so I'm going to POR.

I'll let you know if my build crashes and my CPU bursts into flames... :)

Regards,
James Rasmussen