This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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] |
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Rainer Orth > <ro@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: >> Richard Guenther <richard.guenther@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> I have >>> >>> /* Define to 1 if you have the `elf_getshdrstrndx' function. */ >>> #ifndef USED_FOR_TARGET >>> /* #undef HAVE_ELF_GETSHDRSTRNDX */ >>> #endif >>> >>> >>> /* Define to 1 if you have the `elf_getshstrndx' function. */ >>> #ifndef USED_FOR_TARGET >>> #define HAVE_ELF_GETSHSTRNDX 1 >>> #endif >>> >>> and elfutils libelf. >> >> That one implements the gABI elf_getshstrndx AFAIK, so >> HAVE_ELF_GETSHSTRNDX_GABI should be defined. >> >>> Appearantly your elf_getshdrstrnd wrapper doesn't work. >>> elf_getshstrndx returns zero for me. ?So it appears >>> that instead of ? 0 : -1 you should simply forward the >>> return value. >> >> Which is done in the HAVE_ELF_GETSHSTRNDX_GABI case. ?Could you check >> gcc/config.log to find out why the configure test doesn't detect this? > > And honza now reports > > ?../../gcc/lto/lto-elf.c:469:3: error: 'elf_getshstrndx' is > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? deprecated (declared at /home/jh/trunk/libelf/lib/libelf.h:261) > > thus, the configure checks should probably use -Werror (which > won't reliably work for non-gcc host compilers ...). ?Or we > should build with -Wno-deprecated-declarations. For reference, the following is the patch I'm testing. Richard.
Attachment:
p
Description: Binary data
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |