This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: other/7535: GCC configuration problem: failed to correctly detect hidden attribute support
- From: "Zagorodnev, Grigory" <Grigory_Zagorodnev at stl dot sarov dot ru>
- To: "'nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "'gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "'gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "Zagorodnev, Grigory" <Grigory_Zagorodnev at stl dot sarov dot ru>, "'nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "'gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2002 16:12:54 +0400
- Subject: RE: other/7535: GCC configuration problem: failed to correctly detect hidden attribute support
And more below...
> State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
> State-Changed-By: nathan
> State-Changed-When: Thu Aug 8 03:57:17 2002
> State-Changed-Why:
> This is a binutils bug. From gcc's configure.in
> # GNU LD versions before 2.12.1 have buggy support for
> STV_HIDDEN.
> # This is irritatingly difficult to feature test for. Look for
> # the date string after the version number.
> binutils after 2.12.1 are known good
Few lines below, same gcc's configure.in does try to test 'hidden' feature
of binutils older then 2.12.1. As far as I understand, this checking is
failing. Is'n it?
Generally, I agree that usage of buggy functionality is not a good idea. And
suppose it is reasonable to ignore it.
But the implementation does not provide any alternative to 'hidden'. That
makes __cxa_atexit/__cxa_finalize inapplicable.