------- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-11 20:53 -------
Hey Jonathan. It would be most helpful if you could come up with a test case. I know, it will be a pain and difficult, etc etc etc yadda yadda yadda, but really this would be enormously helpful. Instead of putting this back to the previous approach, I'd be more inclined to use some kind of gthread_once approach. That's the usual approach that seems to work well when used in locales where order-of-initialization has to be defined with certainty, and in io, etc. As this is present in the 4.2.x toolchain, we should probably adjust the bug report to say this. I suspect this will only be fixed in the 4.3.x toolchain though. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36801
