This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [lto, doc] Use nm -png in collect2 on Solaris 2
- From: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at gmail dot com>
- To: Rainer Orth <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>, Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:47:20 +0000
- Subject: Re: [lto, doc] Use nm -png in collect2 on Solaris 2
- References: <yddk4kdurg5.fsf@manam.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
On 16/11/2010 17:08, Rainer Orth wrote:
> and on sparc-sun-solaris2.10 where it exposed 181 regressions. Eric
> already described the issue in
> but got no reply whatsoever.
Sorry Eric, I saw and have kept your email aside, but wanted to finish
dealing with PR462690 before I replied.
> Would it be acceptable to deal with this in libiberty/simple-object-elf.c
> (simple_object_elf_attributes_compare) the same way it was done in
> gcc/lto/lto-elf.c (is_compatible_architecture) before, i.e. upgrade
> attrs1->machine to EM_SPARC32PLUS if a v8plus object file is added?
Yes, I think adding the machine info to the attributes is the best solution,
it was certainly what I planned to try doing.
> It would be good to have this breakage fixed soon, given that is has
> existed for almost two weeks since the introduction of the
> simple_object_* functions.
Again, sorry; not forgotten but I should have said I'd put it on my to-do
list. It was a matter of getting major features in during stage 1 so that we
could fix any bugs arising during stage 3...
Shall I leave it with you, or would you like me to go and have a bash at it?
I'm not a SPARC expert but if you pointed me at a testcase I could go use the
cfarm machines to test a patch.