Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I believe they're from the dynamic linker (ld.elf_so), in this case.
That would indicate that the dynamic linker does not know what .hidden
symbols are, which is a problem on its own.
We have to consider __dso_handle and __cxa_atexit separately. For
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's from the build area... binutils is currently:
binutils 2.13.90.0.4-1 The GNU assembler, ...
binutils-dev 2.13.90.0.4-1 The GNU binary utilities ...
binutils-doc 2.13.90.0.4-1 Documentation for the GNU assembler, ...
binutils-multi
On Tue, Sep 03, 2002 at 07:20:19AM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I believe they're from the dynamic linker (ld.elf_so), in this case.
That would indicate that the dynamic linker does not know what .hidden
symbols are, which is a problem on its own.
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 08:18:01AM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
# of expected passes5176
# of unexpected failures1114
# of expected failures 977
# of untested testcases 15
# of unsupported tests 3
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 01:10:08AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 08:18:01AM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
# of expected passes5176
# of unexpected failures1114
# of expected failures 977
# of
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 10:06:51AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 01:10:08AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 08:18:01AM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
# of expected passes5176
# of unexpected
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 10:06:51AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 01:10:08AM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 08:18:01AM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
# of expected passes5176
# of unexpected
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 08:08:07PM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 03:35:11PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
On Mon, Sep 02, 2002 at 10:23:40PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
We have to consider __dso_handle and __cxa_atexit separately. For
__dso_handle, can you tell
As the subject implies, I'm trying to build the 3.2 compiler for the NetBSD
port (which currently has gcc version 3.1 20020210 (Debian experimental)
as it's compiler, FWIW).
It builds, with some moderate level of warnings, but gets all the way
through making packages. However, during the process,
9 matches
Mail list logo