On Thu, 5 Dec 2019 at 12:43, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 05/12/19 09:00 +0100, Christophe Lyon wrote: > >On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 10:16, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > >> On 03/12/19 09:11 +0100, Christophe Lyon wrote: > >> >On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 at 04:34, Tom Honermann <t...@honermann.net> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> A revised patch is attached that modifies the tests for deleted ostream > >> >> inserters to require C++2a. This is required by the revision of patch > >> >> 2/4 that adds proper preprocessor conditionals to the definitions. > >> >> > >> >> Tom. > >> >> > >> >> On 9/15/19 3:40 PM, Tom Honermann wrote: > >> >> > This patch adds new tests to validate new deleted overloads of > >> >> > wchar_t, > >> >> > char8_t, char16_t, and char32_t for ordinary and wide formatted > >> >> > character and string ostream inserters. > >> >> > > >> >> > Additionally, new tests are added to validate invocations of u8path > >> >> > with > >> >> > sequences of char8_t for both the C++17 and filesystem TS > >> >> > implementations. > >> >> > > >> >> > libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: > >> >> > > >> >> > 2019-09-15 Tom Honermann <t...@honermann.net> > >> >> > > >> >> > * > >> >> > libstdc++-v3/testsuite/27_io/basic_ostream/inserters_character/char/deleted.cc: > >> >> > > >> >> > New test to validate deleted overloads of character and string > >> >> > inserters for narrow ostreams. > >> >> > * > >> >> > libstdc++-v3/testsuite/27_io/basic_ostream/inserters_character/wchar_t/deleted.cc: > >> >> > > >> >> > New test to validate deleted overloads of character and string > >> >> > inserters for wide ostreams. > >> >> > * > >> >> > libstdc++-v3/testsuite/27_io/filesystem/path/factory/u8path-char8_t.cc: > >> >> > New test to validate u8path invocations with sequences of > >> >> > char8_t. > >> >> > * > >> >> > libstdc++-v3/testsuite/experimental/filesystem/path/factory/u8path-char8_t.cc > >> >> > > >> >> > New test to validate u8path invocations with sequences of > >> >> > char8_t. > >> >> > > >> > > >> >Hi, > >> > > >> >I've noticed that the new test > >> >27_io/filesystem/path/factory/u8path-char8_t.cc > >> >fails to compile on arm-none-eabi with default cpu/fpu, because: > >> >/tools/arm-none-eabi/bin/ld: > >> >/obj-arm-none-eabi/gcc3/arm-none-eabi/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs/libstdc++.a(string-inst.o): > >> >in function > >> >`_ZNSt7__cxx1112basic_stringIcSt11char_traitsIcESaIcEEaSEOS4_': > >> >string-inst.cc:(.text._ZNSt7__cxx1112basic_stringIcSt11char_traitsIcESaIcEEaSEOS4_[_ZNSt7__cxx1112basic_stringIcSt11char_traitsIcESaIcEEaSEOS4_]+0xf4): > >> >undefined reference to `_ZSt15__alloc_on_moveISaIcEEvRT_S2_' > >> >[etc...] > >> > >> That function is defined inline and so should be instantiated in any > >> TU that needs it, and so should not give linker errors. There was a > >> similar bug reported the other day that turned out to be pilot error: > >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92733 > >> > >Hi, > >Sorry for the delay, it took me a while to reproduce the problem manually. > >I think I see this because I build that particular configuration with > >CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET=-fno-threadsafe-statics > > > >Does that sound plausible? > > Not really ... I still don't know why that function template would > ever be undefined. >
Hmmm that's because doing CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET means that the generated Makefile contains: CXXFLAGS = -fno-threadsafe-statics while if I don't define CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET, it contains CXXFLAGS = -g -O2 -D_GNU_SOURCE Re-compiling string-inst with -O2 removes the undefined reference Sigh... looks like I fixed something similar 7 years ago :-( https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=189046 So... the current configure.ac code makes sure -O2 and -g are present in CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET only if it's derived from CXXFLAGS, which happens only when CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET is NOT overridden, and not cross-compiling... We have: case " $CXXFLAGS " in *" -O2 "*) ;; *) CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="-O2 $CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET" ;; esac Why isn't it case "$CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET" instead? And that whole case/esac should be after the 'fi'. Or is it that way on purpose? So it seems the fix for the problem I saw is for me to use CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="-O2 -g -fno-threadsafe-statics" Christophe
