This is the mail archive of the 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]

Re: [PATCH] Use .init_array, .fini_array sections for ARM EABI (broke -target=avr)

On Sun, May 01, 2005 at 12:36:21PM -0400, Paul Schlie wrote:
> > From: "Joseph S. Myers" <>
> >> On Sat, 30 Apr 2005, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> >>> Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> /usr/ccs/bin/ld: Unsatisfied symbols:
> >>>    __main (first referenced in build/genmodes.o) (code)
> >>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> >>> make[2]: *** [build/genmodes] Error 1
> >> 
> >> Has this configuration always used __main, but now we fail to define it?  Or
> >> are we now calling it where before we did not?
> > 
> > Previously (with a 2005-04-29 compiler), "int main(){return 0;}" compiles
> > to code not calling __main.  Now (with a 2005-04-30 compiler) it compiles
> > to code calling __main.
> As a general question: in lieu of grafting INIT_ARRAY_SECTION_ASM_OP into
> GCC's target/ABI neutral sources, might it be preferable to extend a
> target's ability to utilize INIT_SECTION_ASM_OP control the definition of
> any behavior, symbol names, etc., as may be required to enable a target to
> support EABI, or any other target specific initialization conventions as may
> be desired?

I'm afraid I can't make heads or tails out of what you're asking. 
Especially the bit about "target/ABI neutral sources", of which GCC has
very few.

Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC

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