--- Comment #26 from carlos at codesourcery dot com 2009-04-24 20:41
---
Action items left:
1) Checkin a patch to libc-ports to define __signbitl as an alias of __signbit
on hppa.
* Done: http://sourceware.org/ml/glibc-cvs/2009-q2/msg00277.html
2) Someone please add a stub to libstdc+
--- Comment #25 from carlos at codesourcery dot com 2009-04-24 20:31
---
Jakub's patch works for me on HPPA, and correctly exports the *l prototypes
with __NO_LONG_DOUBLE_MATH set.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39491
--- Comment #24 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-04-23 19:01
---
Subject: Re: [4.4/4.5 regression] symbol __signb...@glibcxx_3.4
in libstdc++ not exported anymore
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #21 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #23 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 17:16 ---
So:
* Original submitter is incorrect, there has never been a
__signb...@glibcxx_3.4 symbol, and there should not be one now?
Right. This should have manifested as an abi-check FAIL starting in gcc-4.2, as
a new sym
--- Comment #22 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 16:55 ---
>The hppa port sets long-double-fcts = no in glibc
> and this causes all the aliases to be created, otherwise you'd never
> be able to link anything that used `l' ending math functions. Defining
> __NO_LONG_DOUBLE_MATH
--- Comment #21 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 06:28 ---
Created an attachment (id=17682)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17682&action=view)
glibc-no-long-double-math.patch
I agree that even for __NO_LONG_DOUBLE_MATH we should provide *l prototypes
(cer
--- Comment #20 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-04-22 23:34
---
Subject: Re: [4.4/4.5 regression] symbol __signb...@glibcxx_3.4
in libstdc++ not exported anymore
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote:
> > From glibc's perspective there is no suc
--- Comment #19 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-04-22
23:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4/4.5 regression] symbol __signb...@glibcxx_3.4 in libstdc++
not exported anymore
> Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I should have been. The glibc port for
> hppa has always been configured ne
--- Comment #18 from carlos at codesourcery dot com 2009-04-22 22:42
---
Subject: Re: [4.4/4.5 regression] symbol __signb...@glibcxx_3.4
in libstdc++ not exported anymore
>> * Original submitter is incorrect, there has never been a
>> __signb...@glibcxx_3.4 symbol, and there should n
--- Comment #17 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-04-22
19:32 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4/4.5 regression] symbol __signb...@glibcxx_3.4 in libstdc++
not exported anymore
> * Original submitter is incorrect, there has never been a
> __signb...@glibcxx_3.4 symbol, and there sho
--- Comment #16 from carlos at codesourcery dot com 2009-04-22 18:33
---
So what is required to close this issue?
* Original submitter is incorrect, there has never been a
__signb...@glibcxx_3.4 symbol, and there should not be one now?
* glibc on hppa-linux-gnu has never had a __signb
--- Comment #15 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-22 14:34 ---
Well, double double is IMHO really very problematic format, but only powerpc*
switched to it. alpha, s390* and sparc* use standard IEEE quad long double.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39491
--- Comment #14 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-04-22
13:45 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4/4.5 regression] symbol __signb...@glibcxx_3.4 in libstdc++
not exported anymore
> --- Comment #13 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-22 09:12
> ---
> If hppa-linux has l
--- Comment #13 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-22 09:12 ---
If hppa-linux has long double the same as double (which raises the question why
it hasn't switched over to 128-bit long double together with
powerpc*/sparc*/s390*/alpha back in 2006), then __NO_LONG_DOUBLE_MATH should
--- Comment #12 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-04-21
21:01 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4/4.5 regression] symbol __signb...@glibcxx_3.4 in libstdc++
not exported anymore
> At present glibc does not create an long double alias for the double __signbit
> function, but for the s
--- Comment #11 from carlos at codesourcery dot com 2009-04-21 20:16
---
Yes, if gcc does not determine that "sizeof (x) == sizeof (double)" then it
would have to emit code for the if-then-else statement and this would create a
reference to an undefined __signbitl. Has this ever happene
--- Comment #10 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-21 19:49
---
Gcc always seems to optimize the signbit macro.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39491
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-04-21
17:28 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4/4.5 regression] symbol __signb...@glibcxx_3.4 in libstdc++
not exported anymore
> > I believe the problem is the symbol was exported when it shouldn't have
> > been.
>
> How?
This is p
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.4.0 |4.4.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39491
--- Comment #8 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2009-04-21 14:36 ---
- config/abi/pre/gnu.ver needs the __signbitl symbol mentioned as well.
- the patch has an empty #ifdef/#endif at the end
with this change the symbol is found in the library. checked with a native
build on hppa-linux.
--
--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-21 03:04 ---
> I believe the problem is the symbol was exported when it shouldn't have been.
How?
> The signbit macro is provided by math.h.
But it's not in the baseline files showing that it is exported. This question
was origi
--- Comment #6 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-17 00:56 ---
I believe the problem is the symbol was exported when it shouldn't have been.
The signbit macro is provided by math.h.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39491
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-04-17
00:20 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4/4.5 regression] symbol __signb...@glibcxx_3.4 in libstdc++
not exported anymore
> Bloody hack but will probably work
Long double on hppa-linux is the same as double (64 bits).
Dave
--
--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-16 23:09 ---
There is no __signbitl export expected, from
config/abi/post/hppa-linux-gnu/baseline_symbols.txt. Where is this from?
Assume this would result in an abi_check FAIL?
FYI
gcc-4.4 hppa-linux results are fine:
http://gc
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-16 22:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=17649)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17649&action=view)
adds __signbitl for hppa
Bloody hack but will probably work
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-16 22:12 ---
Mine
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc
26 matches
Mail list logo
