https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118701
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2025-01-30
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #0)
> This is the first time libstdc++.so has this issue, so the script cannot
> yet handle this. I'll harden it not to break in situations like this, but
> the
> question remains how to properly handle this in gnu.ver:
>
> * Keep the new version as is, creating a (useless) weak version on everything
> but RISC-V.
> * Make the version strong (terminology?). On Solaris, this could be done by
> prefixing the symbols with global: outside __riscv. However, GNU ld chokes
> on this.
> * Move the __riscv #ifdef outside the version definition.
>
> I thing the third variant would be best.
Yes, I think so too. I don't see why we would want CXXABI_1.3.16 to exist on
targets where no symbols use that version.
Jakub, do you agree?
