Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com> writes:
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt19istreambuf_iteratorIcSt11char_traitsIcEEppEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.5
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt19istreambuf_iteratorIwSt11char_traitsIwEEppEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.5
>>> I don't think this is a new issue, I see it in 4.6 branch and even in 4.5
>>> branch. At some point we had a problem which Jakub patched (thus the *XX
>>> variants), the actual story is longish but is not new, I'm not sure you are
>>> interested in thegory details.
>> Perhaps you have a pointer?
> I can search, but really the issue is very, very old and we already
> released *many* GCCs "affected".
For the case at hand, I doubt that: those are additions between the gcc
4.6.0 and 4.7.0 Solaris baselines. They have not been present in
Solaris libstdc++.so on 4.6.
>>>> * There's quite a number of additions to 3.4.11:
>>>>
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNKSt10lock_error4whatEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt18condition_variable10notify_allEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt18condition_variable10notify_oneEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt18condition_variable4waitERSt11unique_lockISt5mutexE@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt18condition_variableC1Ev@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt18condition_variableC2Ev@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt18condition_variableD1Ev@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt18condition_variableD2Ev@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt22condition_variable_anyC1Ev@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt22condition_variable_anyC2Ev@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt22condition_variable_anyD1Ev@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt22condition_variable_anyD2Ev@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt6thread15_M_start_threadESt10shared_ptrINS_10_Impl_baseEE@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt6thread4joinEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:_ZNSt6thread6detachEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +FUNC:__once_proxy@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +OBJECT:12:_ZTISt10lock_error@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +OBJECT:15:_ZTSSt10lock_error@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +OBJECT:20:_ZTVSt10lock_error@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +OBJECT:24:_ZTISt10lock_error@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>>> +OBJECT:40:_ZTVSt10lock_error@@GLIBCXX_3.4.11
>>> This, I don't see why you considered it some sort of "problem"?!? Yes we
>>> started exporting some additional symbols, in 3.4.11, I can confirm that.
>> Adding new symbols to an old version is fundamentally wrong IMO:
> Totally agreed, but who did that? Those symbols are exported @3.4.11. I
> still don't understand.
They would be exported @3.4.11 if they had been present before. On
Solaris before 4.7, there were not.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
