http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #42 from Mike Stump 2011-08-11
13:26:18 UTC ---
Ick. Oh well. Ok, how about outright removing for all darwin releases the -c
setting? I think the only thing this could break was fortran. I have no clue
about what to do for Ada. :
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #41 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-11
13:22:46 UTC ---
Note that I can also confirm the failure from Comment 4 on darwin11. Using
unpatched gcc trunk svn at r177665 when building with clang on darwin11
using...
../gcc-4.7-20110811/configu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #40 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-11
12:47:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #39)
> ... unless you can produce a patch (or identify a plan for such a patch) that
> would obviate the need for common symbols in the darwin port, it doesn't se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #39 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-11 08:52:24
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #37)
> This issue is not fixed.
concur.
Mike; there are two problems.
a. the link line for gcc/gengtype (recently introduced) includes both errors.o
and libcomm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #38 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-11
01:25:05 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #35)
> I believe this problem has been fixed. trim_filename doesn't appear twice.
Exactly what commit led you to believe this was fixed? I see nothing that
coul
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #36 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-10
23:22:57 UTC ---
Still broken at r177628 with
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2011-08/msg00935.html and...
../gcc-4.7-20110810/configure --prefix=/sw --prefix=/sw/lib/gcc4.7
--mandir=/sw/share/man --i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
m...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #34 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-09
22:00:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #33)
> The patches are wrong, so, I don't favor them. The patch to fix this, is the
> patch to either boost things to -fno-common, or to fix trim_filename.
I am
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #33 from Mike Stump 2011-08-09
20:58:15 UTC ---
The patches are wrong, so, I don't favor them. The patch to fix this, is the
patch to either boost things to -fno-common, or to fix trim_filename.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #32 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-09 20:28:54
UTC ---
testing this (all languages, lto bootstrap, compare debug) on darwin 9.
will post comment 6 for review (it's a tidy up anyway unless there's some
gotcha reason for not doing it on some
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #31 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-09
20:23:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #27)
> So, the fix is trivial but you guys are wondering in the weeds. Make the
> symbols unique and be done with it, that, or remove one of them. You are
> gett
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #30 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-09 18:57:36
UTC ---
so, if we have no regressions from omitting the "-c" we might conclude that
things have changed since then ;-)
===
simple testcase:
$ cat /Volumes/ScratchCS/tests/statlib.c
int com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #29 from Mike Stump 2011-08-09
17:55:15 UTC ---
>From the thread last time we talked about this code:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-12/msg01183.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #28 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-09 17:41:25
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #27)
> So, the fix is trivial but you guys are wondering in the weeds. Make the
> symbols unique and be done with it, that, or remove one of them. You are
> getti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #27 from Mike Stump 2011-08-09
17:29:28 UTC ---
So, the fix is trivial but you guys are wondering in the weeds. Make the
symbols unique and be done with it, that, or remove one of them. You are
getting hung up on darwin -c stuff, ig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #26 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-09 15:40:38
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> (In reply to comment #23)
>
> > and ... watch out for the first case matching all darwin ;-) and the second
> > never firing.
>
> Why would you say that?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #25 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-09
15:30:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> and ... watch out for the first case matching all darwin ;-) and the second
> never firing.
Why would you say that? I believe we have many instances of
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #24 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-09
15:27:34 UTC ---
Then you will also want to adjust the original toplevel configure change...
Author: mrs
Date: Fri Mar 19 10:19:52 2010
New Revision: 157563
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #23 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-09 14:49:19
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> or more correctly just...
>
> Index: gcc/configure.ac
> ===
> --- gcc/configure.ac(revis
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #22 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-09
14:35:18 UTC ---
or more correctly just...
Index: gcc/configure.ac
===
--- gcc/configure.ac(revision 177598)
+++ gcc/configure.ac
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #21 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-09 14:26:36
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> I wonder if addressing...
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42554#c15
>
> would help such that the change in r157563 is extended to gcc/confi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #20 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-09
14:19:34 UTC ---
I wonder if addressing...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42554#c15
would help such that the change in r157563 is extended to gcc/configure[.ac]
would make any difference
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #19 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-09 14:10:46
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #18)
> The radr://6320843, "duplicate symbols from static libraries not properly
> ignored", has been open since 26-Oct-2008. I later opened radr://6733684,
> "dupl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #18 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-09
13:52:29 UTC ---
The radr://6320843, "duplicate symbols from static libraries not properly
ignored", has been open since 26-Oct-2008. I later opened radr://6733684,
"duplicate symbols in static libs no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #17 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-09 13:15:26
UTC ---
the use of "-c" (for libbackend.a) was introduced by
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=84088
without any specific comment as to why it was done.
trying *-darwin9 and x8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #16 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-09 11:56:33
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > This is radar://6320843 "duplicate symbols from static libraries not
> > properly
> > ignored" revisiting us...
>
> hm I doub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #15 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-09 10:17:45
UTC ---
ld doesn't "ignore" anything - the rules it is (supposed) to use are there in
"man ld".
however suppose:
object.o : contains (public) symbols foo and bar
library.a : contains (public
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #14 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-09
00:09:08 UTC ---
Iain,
I would also add that when I was trying avoid having to resort to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-08/msg01583.html, I found that the
linker bug, where duplicate symbols
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #13 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-08
22:59:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > This is radar://6320843 "duplicate symbols from static libraries not
> > properly
> > ignored" revisiting us...
>
> hm I dou
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #12 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-08 22:41:32
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> This is radar://6320843 "duplicate symbols from static libraries not properly
> ignored" revisiting us...
hm I doubt it.
Check the Makefiles for darwin11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-08 22:39:31
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> > It doesn't seem to me to have much to do with lto - it seems a build issue.
> > I.E. one should not be including two different implementations of the
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #10 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-08
19:27:58 UTC ---
This is radar://6320843 "duplicate symbols from static libraries not properly
ignored" revisiting us...
26-Oct-2008 10:43 AM Jack Howarth:
Xcode 3.2 fails to link cc1plus-dummy from g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-08
18:31:02 UTC ---
> It doesn't seem to me to have much to do with lto - it seems a build issue.
> I.E. one should not be including two different implementations of the
> diagnostics on the same
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-08 18:22:38
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> > Apparently the key is "--enable-checking=something".
>
> It is even more subtle (x86_64-apple-darwin10):
>
> ../work/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc/gcc4.7w
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-08
18:12:34 UTC ---
> Apparently the key is "--enable-checking=something".
It is even more subtle (x86_64-apple-darwin10):
../work/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc/gcc4.7w
--enable-languages=c,c++,for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-08 17:57:06
UTC ---
Created attachment 24951
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24951
make errors.c match core-diagnostic.c in the shared interfaces
OK. So Darwin's ld is telling the truth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-08
17:45:03 UTC ---
We seem to have...
/* Given a partial pathname as input, return another pathname that
shares no directory elements with the pathname of __FILE__. This
is used by fancy_abort()
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-06
16:29:58 UTC ---
On x86_64-apple-darwin10 I get the same bootstrap failure:
...
mv -f Tlto-wrapper lto-wrapper
gcc -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings
-Wcast-qual -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #3 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-05
23:21:36 UTC ---
Confirmed on x86_64-apple-darwiin11 that the lto-bootstrap failure due to
duplicate symbols in introduced at...
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Aug 4 11:30:45 2011
New Revision: 177358
URL:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-apple-darwin11 |x86_64-apple-darwin{10,11}
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #1 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-05
17:12:16 UTC ---
$ ../gcc-4.7-20110805/configure --prefix=/sw --prefix=/sw/lib/gcc4.7
--mandir=/sw/share/man --infodir=/sw/lib/gcc4.7/info
--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto --enable-stage1-languages=c
42 matches
Mail list logo
