https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6ee5892638526366fc3d8a1f4426f3cc278ea061
commit r12-7752-g6ee5892638526366fc3d8a1f4426f3cc278ea061
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
--- Comment #12 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> Created attachment 52656
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52656=edit
> gcc12-pr102426.patch
>
> So like this then?
I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 52656
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52656=edit
gcc12-pr102426.patch
So like this then?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
--- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #8)
>> > --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
>> > So, shouldn't we instead of the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #8)
> > --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> > So, shouldn't we instead of the -export-symbols-regex use a version script?
>
> We certainly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> So, shouldn't we instead of the -export-symbols-regex use a version script?
We certainly could, but IIUC this would lose the functionality on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #5)
> note that same error happens on older x86_64-linux debian boxes.
That has to be a totally different issue from here. This is specificially about
solaris specific
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
> It seems like only this feature which libtool gets wrong.
>
> There are other places where lt_cv_prog_gnu_ld/with_gnu_ld is checked.
> So it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-09-21
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
So libtool has been broken for over 15 years for this option and we are only
noticing now. G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102426
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
16 matches
Mail list logo
