https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86490
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov <amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3) > It is because gold doesn't check archive for a common definition. Please elaborate - does ld.bfd try to extract static archive members when it already has a common definition? Why? > Is there a common symbol involved? I don't think so, but I'm not sure. We've also seen other pain points like the same member extracted and given to the plugin multiple times, even though the second extraction cannot possibly satisfy any unresolved references.
