http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58239
--- Comment #6 from Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #4) > > OK, I see the emitted reference to 'operator delete', and I suspect I > > have an idea of why the compiler generated this reference even though > > it isn't used anywhere in the input source code. > > > > Why are we linking gnatlink with xgcc and not with xg++ -nostdc++? > > Because we haven't had a real need up to now, IOW we always managed to > massage things so as to avoid the dependency. Maybe it's the end of the > road... Well, that was a latent bug in the existing code base. The Ada front-end (more specifically gnatmake, gnatlink and consorts) linked against "common" files from GCC source code, most of which are compiled or are C++ source files. It should have linked with xg++. I have a patch right out of the door while typing this message. I hope you get a chance to review and comment it. I only changed the parts that I empirically determined to be in trouble. I welcome your input as someone who has a broader view to see whether they are other executables that need to be linked with xg++. -- Gaby
