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 libstdc++/88125] Erroneous duplicate "basic_stringbuf" symbol entry in libstdc++ gnu.ver file.


https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88125

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2018-11-21
                 CC|                            |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
           Assignee|jakub at gcc dot gnu.org           |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I don't remember anything concerning this exact symbol, the set of changes has
been done because some symbols that weren't present in the original gcc 3.4.0
release's libstdc++.so.6 were added later on into the GLIBCXX_3.4 symbol
version by mistake, so the changes ensured those symbols stayed as
compatibility symbols in that symver and were added (usually?) into
GLIBCXX_3.4.5 symbol version for default linking.
This particular symbol has been present already in the original 3.4.0 release:
readelf -Wa libstdc++.so.6.0.0 | grep
_ZNKSt15basic_stringbufIwSt11char_traitsIwESaIwEE3strEv                         
00000000001d7a50  00000b0600000007 R_X86_64_JUMP_SLOT     000000000008b680
_ZNKSt15basic_stringbufIwSt11char_traitsIwESaIwEE3strEv + 0
  2822: 000000000008b680   104 FUNC    WEAK   DEFAULT   11
_ZNKSt15basic_stringbufIwSt11char_traitsIwESaIwEE3strEv@@GLIBCXX_3.4
as proven from an old rpm I found in RHEL repo.  Strangely, that symbol isn't
even mentioned in the I think latest patch submission:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-06/msg01476.html
and appared probably in between that posting and the final commit in r101125 .

So, I'd say removing that GLIBCXX_3.4.6 reference to that symbol should be
fine, but will defer that to libstdc++ maintainers.

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