On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 6:02 AM Wilco Dijkstra <wilco.dijks...@arm.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > However, this is an undocumented change in the current NEWS, and seeing > >> literally hundreds of package failures, I doubt that's the right thing to > >> do, at > >> least without any deprecation warning first. Could that be handled, > >> deprecating > >> in GCC 10 first, and the changing that for GCC 11? > > This change was first proposed for GCC8, and rejected because of failures in > the > distros. Two years have passed, and there are still failures... Would this > change if > we postpone it even longer? My feeling is that nobody is going to actively > fix their > code if the default isn't changed first. > > > It is hard to get a warning for things like this. > > Could the linker warn whenever it merges common symbols or would that give > many false positives?
That might get some false positives for some Fortran code (where common symbols are "common") (and maybe C++ code; C++ sometimes uses common symbols but only if weak support does not exist). Thanks, Andrew Pinski > > Wilco
