This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug target/46072] AIX linker chokes on debug info for uninitialized static variables
- From: "david.kirkby at onetel dot net" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 24 Mar 2011 13:22:33 -0000
- Subject: [Bug target/46072] AIX linker chokes on debug info for uninitialized static variables
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-46072-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46072
--- Comment #16 from Dr. David Kirkby <david.kirkby at onetel dot net> 2011-03-24 13:22:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> Let me try and recap.
>
> The initial report was that 5.3 TL10 did *not* have the error. I discovered
> that 5.3 TL10 SP03 does. See [1].
>
> APAR IZ81343[2] and its sister APARs addresses this issue. It is shipped (for
> example) in 5.3 TL10 SP05 as IZ81339.
>
> After you apply that APAR, you get a new issue where the linker now spews out:
>
> ld: 0711-596 SEVERE ERROR: Object expand.o
> An RLD for section 2 (.data) refers to symbol 852,
> but the storage class of the symbol is not C_EXT or C_HIDEXT.
This is odd. I have
-bash-4.1$ oslevel -rq
Known Recommended Maintenance Levels
------------------------------------
5300-12
5300-11
5300-10
5300-09
5300-08
5300-07
5300-06
5300-05
5300-04
5300-03
5300-02
5300-01
5300-00
and whilst I can't see how to get the information on the service pack, I have
service pack 2.
https://www-304.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg1IZ83065
dated 17th Jan 2011.
So why am I getting the error on this bug report (ld: 0711-593 SEVERE ERROR:
Symbol C_BSTAT) and not ld: 0711-596 SEVERE ERROR?
If I understand you correctly, you are saying ld: 0711-593 SEVERE ERROR: Symbol
C_BSTAT) was fixed in AIX 5.3 5300-10 Service Pack 3, which is dated March 24,
2010
https://www-304.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=isg1SSRVAIX53TL10071505_161
That is some 10 months prior to the service pack I have.
I suspect I am mis-understanding something.
I'm using a 32-bit RS/6000 7025 F50, with 4 x 332 MHz CPUs, 3 GB RAM, which I
know is an antique in computer terms.
Dave