On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 10:56:52AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
I would be especially grateful for people testing this on primary hosts
that are not linux. In particular, AIX and Solaris.
OK on Solaris 2.5.1 and 2.6, but not OK on Solaris 7, 8, 9 and 10:
Can you please post output from
Can you please post output from
readelf -Ws libstdc++.so.6 \
| sed -n '/\.symtab/,$d;/ UND /d;/\(GLOBAL\|WEAK\)/p' \
| awk '{ if ($4 == OBJECT) { printf %s %s %s %s %s\n, $8, $4, $5, $6,
| $3 } else { printf %s %s %s %s\n, $8, $4, $5, $6 }}' \ LC_ALL=C sort
| -u
before and after
Volker Reichelt wrote:
Hi Mark,
you wrote
Those who have been watching carefully will note that there is no sign of an
actual
4.0.1 release.
since the branch has been frozen for quite sime time now, a lot of patches
for the 4.0 branch have piled up.
Given the facts that
a) we'll have
And that one should be fixed by the patch I posted, so Solaris
should be hopefully fine.
Yup, OK everywhere.
--
Eric Botcazou
1. Benjamin Kosnik reports that there are ABI and/or version-symbol
problems between 3.4.x and 4.0.x version of libstdc++, and is trying to
sort out a solution.
I think I have found an acceptable solution for this issue.
Here is more info:
Daniel Kegel wrote:
Scott Robert Ladd wrote:
Agreed. I've had mixed reports from folks over in the Gentoo universe
about glibc; perhaps this page might be of interest:
http://process-of-elimination.net/?q=gentoo_and_gcc_4_0_0_tips_and_tricks
Hey Scott.
That page is pretty outdated. AFAIK
R Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Kegel wrote:
(Interestingly, the fixes in glibc-cvs
seem to have been made in such a way that
the new glibc won't be compilable by older
versions of gcc, like gcc-3.4.4.
I guess the thinking is that everyone should be using the latest gcc?)
Hmm, do you
Those who have been watching carefully will note that there is no sign
of an actual 4.0.1 release.
There are two blocking issues at the moment:
1. Benjamin Kosnik reports that there are ABI and/or version-symbol
problems between 3.4.x and 4.0.x version of libstdc++, and is trying to
sort out
Mark Mitchell wrote:
2. Jakub Jelinek reports that we're miscompiling GLIBC.
The latter problem seems to me to be as severe as the KDE bug that was
the impetus for this release. The libstdc++ problem also seems serious.
Agreed. I've had mixed reports from folks over in the Gentoo universe
Scott Robert Ladd wrote:
Mark Mitchell wrote:
2. Jakub Jelinek reports that we're miscompiling GLIBC.
[I think this is http://gcc.gnu.org/PR22043 ]
The latter problem seems to me to be as severe as the KDE bug that was
the impetus for this release. ...
Agreed. I've had mixed reports
10 matches
Mail list logo
