[Bug lto/81004] [7 Regression] linking failed with -flto and static libboost_program_options

[clyon at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81004

--- Comment #35 from Christophe Lyon <clyon at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It took me a while to reproduce manually: there is an ICE at r258321, which is
fixed by the next backport (r258322), at which point there 6 failures on
aarch64-none-elf:
FAIL: g++.dg/lto/20081125 cp_lto_20081125_0.o-cp_lto_20081125_1.o link, -flto
-flto-partition=1to1
FAIL: g++.dg/lto/20090311 cp_lto_20090311_0.o-cp_lto_20090311_1.o link, -O0
-flto -flto-partition=none -fuse-linker-plugin
FAIL: g++.dg/lto/20090311 cp_lto_20090311_0.o-cp_lto_20090311_1.o link, -O0
-flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects 
FAIL: g++.dg/lto/20091210-1 cp_lto_20091210-1_0.o-cp_lto_20091210-1_1.o link,
-O0 -flto -flto-partition=none -fuse-linker-plugin
FAIL: g++.dg/lto/20091210-1 cp_lto_20091210-1_0.o-cp_lto_20091210-1_1.o link,
-O0 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-fat-lto-objects 
FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr67600.C   -O2 -flto -fuse-linker-plugin
-fno-fat-lto-objects  (test for excess errors)

But my first manual attempt at r258359 had no failure, so the above ones a
probably fixed between r258322 and r258359.

My validation is triggered at every commit on the release branches, so
sometimes this gives too much detail it seems :)