> On 4 Feb 2023, at 22:03, Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> wrote:
> 
> On 2023-02-04 12:23, Sam James wrote:
>> I guess it's hard for me to say given I don't know what options allowed it to be reproduced and I couldn't hit it.
>> I assumed it must have been -Wstrict-aliasing=2 or lower which makes it more aggressive at the risk of false positives.
>> But if you reproduced it, then it's useful, I suppose.
> 
> I didn't reproduce the warning, since I lack GCC "13.1". I merely looked at the Gnulib source and noticed a couple of places where it was not conforming to the C standard.  I have enough knowledge of GCC internals that I think I've changed the code so that it will pacify GCC "13.1".
> 
> Although the updated code still doesn't conform, it should work fine on real platforms. (The old code probably works too, for what it's worth.)

Alright, thanks for explaining - I follow now, cheers.

Maybe we'll get more information from the original reporter too.