This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
-fcheck-memory-usage: link problems
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Subject: -fcheck-memory-usage: link problems
- From: Chris Leger <cleger at telerobotics dot jpl dot nasa dot gov>
- Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 17:35:38 -0700
Short version:
What do I need to use Checker with gcc 2.95.2? I'm at wits end.
Long version:
I'm trying to get the -fcheck-memory-usage functionality of gcc to
work. The only documentation I've found is either (a) incomplete (b)
out of date or (c) both: the GCC manual at gcc.gnu.org seems to imply
that all you need to do is to specify -fcheck-memory-usage, but then I
end up with thousands of undefined symbols (like chkr_set_right) when I
try to link. OTOH the Checker docs say to use the checkergcc program
(which is presumably included in the Checker package, which won't build
for me).
I found a message on the gcc-bugs archive indicating that the
-fcheck-memory-usage just generates hooks for Checker; checking the
Checker homepage, I downloaded Checker-0.9.9.1.tar.gz, but I can't get
it to build. First problem: the configure script doesn't work right
(this is on a PIII running Red Hat 6.2 w/ gcc 2.95.2 installed).
Solution: specify -host=-host=i586-pc-linux-gnu (this is explicitly
listed as a supported platform on
http://www.gnu.org/software/checker/checker.html)
Next problem: Checker won't compile:
./config/i386/Linux/munmap.c: In function `chkr_munmap':
./config/i386/Linux/munmap.c:31: Invalid `asm' statement:
./config/i386/Linux/munmap.c:31: fixed or forbidden register 3 (bx) was
spilled for class BREG.
Reading over the Checker docs again, I applied the patch supplied in
patch/egcs.diff (took me a little while to figure out how, since it
doesn't actually say how in the documentation). I rebuilt gcc, but I
still get the same problem with Checker.
Is there a compiled Checker library available somewhere that I can just
compile and link to? Are there more up-to-date instructions somewhere?
Are there other alternatives that are easier to install?
Thanks,
Chris
(next step: seeing if we have $2K lying around for an insure license)