[Bug libstdc++/77814] build fails trying to build eh_arm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77814 --- Comment #6 from tprince at computer dot org --- Permits bootstrap to proceed, will post to testresults when successful. Thanks.
[Bug libstdc++/77814] build fails trying to build eh_arm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77814 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- Author: redi Date: Mon Oct 3 11:50:46 2016 New Revision: 240710 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=240710=gcc=rev Log: Ensure "C++" language linkage for std::abs overloads PR libstdc++/77814 * include/bits/std_abs.h: Use "C++" language linkage. * testsuite/17_intro/headers/c++2011/linkage.cc: Move to the end. Add . Modified: trunk/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/std_abs.h trunk/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/17_intro/headers/c++2011/linkage.cc
[Bug libstdc++/77814] build fails trying to build eh_arm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77814 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |7.0 --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely --- Should be fixed now, please re-open if not.
[Bug libstdc++/77814] build fails trying to build eh_arm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77814 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Patch being testing now: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-10/msg00058.html
[Bug libstdc++/77814] build fails trying to build eh_arm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77814 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- testsuite/17_intro/headers/c++2011/linkage.cc should have caught this, but didn't due to hiding the problem.
[Bug libstdc++/77814] build fails trying to build eh_arm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77814 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2016-10-03 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Presumably this target doesn't #define NO_IMPLICIT_EXTERN_C All targets should define that in this day and age. I hate that stupid option.
