Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Suppress some "variable might be clobbered by longjmp" warnings.
> >> 
> >> Seen with an older gcc version.  I'm not sure these represent any real
> >> risk factor, but still a bit scary.  Anyway we have lots of other
> >> volatile-marked variables in this code, so a couple more won't hurt.
> 
> > I assume you saw my comment in basebackup.c:
> 	
> > 	 *  Some old compilers, e.g. gcc 2.95.3/x86, think that passing
> > 	 *  a struct in the same function as a longjump might clobber
> > 	 *  a variable.  bjm 2011-02-04
> > 	 *  http://lists.apple.com/archives/xcode-users/2003/Dec//msg00051.html
> 
> Curious that you're getting different warnings with that than I get
> with HPPA 2.95.3.

Yes.  I just found the description at the URL interesting, stating the
gcc just gets confused.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

• Re: pgsql: Suppress some "variable might be clobbered by longjmp" warnings. at 2011-03-10 05:17:03 from Tom Lane

pgsql-committers by date

Next:	From: Robert Haas	Date: 2011-03-10 19:33:18
	Subject: pgsql: Add missing index terms for recovery control functions.
Previous:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2011-03-10 14:10:39
	Subject: pgsql: Use '=' when documenting long options.