On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 at 13:37, Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: > > On 1/6/20 2:29 PM, Matthias Klose wrote: > > On 06.01.20 13:30, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > >> On 06.01.20 11:03, Andrew Pinski wrote: > >>> +GCC > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 1:52 AM Matthias Klose <d...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> In an archive test rebuild with binutils and GCC trunk, I see a lot of > >>>> build > >>>> failures on both aarch64-linux-gnu and arm-linux-gnueabihf failing with > >>>> "multiple definition of symbols" when linking executables, e.g. > >>> > >>> THIS IS NOT A BINUTILS OR GCC BUG. > >>> GCC changed the default to -fno-common. > >>> It seems like for some reason, your non-aarch64/arm builds had changed > >>> the default back to being with -fcommon turned on. > >> > >>> what would that be? I'm not aware of any active change doing that. > >>> Packages > >>> build on x86, ppc64el and s390x at least. > >> > >> Well if you want to build old archived code using latest GCC then you may > >> need to > >> force -fcommon just like you need to add many warning disables. Maybe you > >> were > >> using an older GCC for the other targets? As Andrew notes, this isn't > >> Arm-specific. > > > > found out about why. Started the test rebuild with trunk 20191219, then gave > > back all build failures yesterday with trunk 20200104. And I saw most of > > the > > armhf/arm64 ftbfs when I retriggered failing builds. To get consistent > > results > > I should finish that test rebuild with the -fno-common change reverted. > > > > However, this is an undocumented change in the current NEWS, and seeing > > Hello. > > It's waiting for a review: > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg00311.html
Does that need review? The change is on trunk, documenting it in the release notes needs to be done. But since it is waiting for review, I decided to reply with some comments :-)
