This is the mail archive of the
gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC 4.8 libcpp Issue...Possibly Related To (FIXED)
- From: Cyd Haselton <chaselton at gmail dot com>
- To: "gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 15:15:27 -0500
- Subject: Re: GCC 4.8 libcpp Issue...Possibly Related To (FIXED)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAHu5Pra=xMPYU1=ramkMH+jJyE27CyoGY+C6D-7DttXD8KrWxg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAHu5Prbwk2BP3kX+66fUkBLr=-okDfnJnVfyFGx63BiyLAoO9g at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAH6eHdStOFYQQda1ZFArSHw2jaOzGc4KH9HmRdnWDykRGq=PMg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAHu5PraVBdUMB6nNZzA1OyLG2MjeXUDn75R5SyoKYzPMYMaiqQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAH6eHdS41L_=X1a0tt2YLQR5fut0rjB3vP7auSf-sCEzPeFM-Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAHu5Prb3DUoOpDMSosbY76F3=fyBfK8wjQ=Fj07JN5+p=ZSp6A at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAH6eHdQAM0nXf0i5hCH5A=fOELV_OHxZEzr1XnmJm1H3NQ5_0Q at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 31 October 2013 18:13, Cyd Haselton wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 31 October 2013 13:22, Cyd Haselton wrote:
>>>> Bug submitted, thanks.
>>>
>>> Again, please don't top-post on this list.
>>
>> Again? I don't remember seeing a first request...
>
> There have been a few requests on this list recently, but not to you,
> so the "again" is out of context, sorry.
No worries. I thought I'd missed something in the mailing list documentation
>
>>>> Not sure if this is relevant but the symbol table from objdump -x <4.8
>>>> cc1> after adding explicit cast to files.c shows odd characters
>>>>
>>>
>>> The difference is that GCC 4.8 is compiled with a C++ compiler so the
>>> symbol names are mangled to encode the function signatures, as
>>> required by C++ in order to support function overloading and other
>>> features.
>>
>> Could this have an effect on cross-building a native GCC cc1 binary
>> for Android...i.e. make it more problematic or impossible?
>
> No, it shouldn't be a problem.
I don't suppose it'd be possible to switch back to compiling with gcc
instead of g++ to test?
Unless...are there changes other than the compiler switch for the cc1
or libcpp build?