http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48055
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|lto |testsuite
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48055
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-10
11:14:41 UTC ---
Are there conflicting definitions somewhere? Then it would indeed be a
testsuite bug.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48055
--- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-03-10 12:09:50
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Are there conflicting definitions somewhere? Then it would indeed be a
testsuite bug.
No, these are the only definitions for the
No, these are the only definitions for the particular testcase.
Hmm, in every case it is GNU ld bug - the GNU ld internal ironly section should
not be leaking
to user warnings. Please fill in GNU ld PR.
Honza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48055
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-03-10 12:56:56 UTC
---
No, these are the only definitions for the particular testcase.
Hmm, in every case it is GNU ld bug - the GNU ld internal ironly section should
not be leaking
to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48055
--- Comment #6 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-03-10 14:39:57
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
No, these are the only definitions for the particular testcase.
Hmm, in every case it is GNU ld bug - the GNU ld internal ironly
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48055
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
