https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103728
Pierrick Bouvier changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103728
--- Comment #4 from Pierrick Bouvier ---
Thanks for your suggestion.
We will follow this to upgrade our compiler.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103728
--- Comment #3 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Pierrick Bouvier from comment #2)
> Problem with command line approach is that it implies to patch all our
> scripts, which is *really* boring. At this point, manually adding rt_options
> string i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103728
--- Comment #2 from Pierrick Bouvier ---
Problem with command line approach is that it implies to patch all our scripts,
which is *really* boring. At this point, manually adding rt_options string in
all binaries is easier.
Alas, there is no env
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103728
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
Not sure if there'd be much help from the compiler on this front, as it's a
runtime library feature that unittests are executed in the first place - the
compiler simply generates functions in the proper place
