This is the mail archive of the
gcc-testresults@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Results for 3.4-bi 20021213 (experimental) testsuite on
- From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: John David Anglin <dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca>, gcc-testresults at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 17:32:06 +0000
- Subject: Re: Results for 3.4-bi 20021213 (experimental) testsuite on
- References: <200212150017.gBF0HrO4002275@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> <87hedgds2w.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com>
Zack Weinberg wrote:
"John David Anglin" <dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> writes:
hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 doesn't build:
gcc -g -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wtraditional -pedantic -Wno-long-long -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -o cc1 \
c-parse.o c-lang.o c-pretty-print.o attribs.o c-errors.o c-lex.o c-pragma.o c-decl.o c-typeck.o c-convert.o c-aux-info.o c-common.o c-opts.o c-format.o c-semantics.o c-objc-common.o c-dump.o libcpp.a main.o libbackend.a ../libiberty/libiberty.a
ld: Unsatisfied symbol "__gcov_init" in file libbackend.a[profile.o]
>>The HP linker doesn't like undefined symbols, weak or otherwise.
I'm confused, i thought the point of weak symbols was to allow their
non-definedness. Why is HPUX defining SUPPORTS_WEAK?
#if __GNUC__ && !CROSS_COMPILE && SUPPORTS_WEAK
/* If __gcov_init has a value in the compiler, it means we
are instrumenting ourselves. We should not remove the
counts file, because we might be recompiling
ourselves. The .da files are all removed during copying
the stage1 files. */
extern void __gcov_init (void *)
__attribute__ ((weak));
if (!__gcov_init)
unlink (da_file_name);
#else
unlink (da_file_name);
#endif
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell :: http://www.codesourcery.com :: CodeSourcery LLC
The voices in my head said this was stupid too
nathan@codesourcery.com : http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~nathan/ : nathan@acm.org