This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug bootstrap/50237] [4.7 regression] bootstrap comparison failure for libcpp/lex.o


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50237

--- Comment #24 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> 2011-11-23 15:27:22 UTC ---
> --- Comment #23 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-11-22 18:03:09 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #22)
>> But this is the common case: you cannot expect or require the bootstrap
>> compiler to use the same linker as you configure with.  This is a
>> bootstrap failure which is going to get us much noise if not fixed.
>> 
>
> Have you tried the patch in comment 18?

Not yet, but I'm pretty sure it's wrong: In stage 1, the bootstrap
compiler needn't be gcc, thus may not understand -B, so the result would
be wrong even if you configure with gld 2.22.  I don't understand why
you go through so many contortions, full of unwarranted assumptions,
when a simple check for gld >= 2.22 (or 2.21.9x if absolutely necessary)
would do.  If other linkers gain the same support, the test can be
augmented accordingly.  I know this is ugly and real feature checks are
the preferred way, but they are notoriously hard to get right portably,
so many of them already go this route.

    Rainer


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]