New Ada bootstrap failure: multiple definition of `__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx'

[bobby mcnulty]

H. J. Lu wrote:
> A new linker is needed for comat support:
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-09/msg00930.html
> 
> I am working on a gcc patch to enforce that.
> 
> 
> H.J.
> ----
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 06:36:01PM +0200, Duncan Sands wrote:
> 
>>>>Bootstrapping Ada using today's CVS breaks here:
>>>>
>>>>../../xgcc -B../../ -DIN_GCC   `echo -O2 -g -O2 -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -fno-common |sed -e 's/-pedantic//g' -e 's/-Wtraditional//g'`   -o ../../gnatmake b_gnatm.o a-except.o ctrl_c.o ali.o ali-util.o s-casuti.o alloc.o atree.o binderr.o butil.o casing.o csets.o debug.o elists.o einfo.o erroutc.o errutil.o err_vars.o fmap.o fname.o fname-uf.o fname-sf.o gnatmake.o gnatvsn.o hostparm.o interfac.o i-c.o i-cstrin.o krunch.o lib.o make.o makeusg.o makeutl.o mlib.o mlib-fil.o mlib-prj.o mlib-tgt.o mlib-utl.o namet.o nlists.o opt.o osint.o osint-m.o output.o prj.o prj-attr.o prj-attr-pm.o prj-com.o prj-dect.o prj-env.o prj-err.o prj-ext.o prj-nmsc.o prj-pars.o prj-part.o prj-proc.o prj-strt.o prj-tree.o prj-util.o rident.o s-exctab.o s-secsta.o s-stalib.o s-stoele.o scans.o scng.o sdefault.o sfn_scan.o s-purexc.o s-htable.o sinfo.o sinput.o sinput-c.o sinput-p.o snames.o stand.o stringt.o styleg.o stylesw.o system.o validsw.o switch.o 
switch-m.o table.o targparm.o tempdir.o tree_io.o types.o uintp.o  uname.o urealp.o usage.o widechar.o  \
>>>>     ../rts/libgnat.a  ../../prefix.o ../../version.o link.o ../../../libiberty/libiberty.a
>>>>/usr/lib/libc_nonshared.a(elf-init.oS)(.gnu.linkonce.t.__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx+0x0): In function `__libc_csu_fini':
>>>>/usr/src/packages/BUILD/glibc-2.3/csu/elf-init.c:74: multiple definition of `__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx'
>>>>../rts/libgnat.a(adaint.o)(.gnu.linkonce.t.__i686.get_pc_thunk.bx+0x0):/home/duncan/tmp/gcc-objects/gcc/ada/rts/adaint.c:289: first defined here
>>>>collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>>>>make[4]: *** [../../gnatmake] Error 1
>>>>
>>>>All the best,
>>>>
>>>>Duncan.
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>
>>>Which stage, the second one?
>>
>>Good question.  I just bootstrapped again to check, and this time didn't get it!
>>So either I didn't clean out the tree sufficiently before the previous build
>>(most likely), or there is something non-deterministic in the build process.
>>
>>All the best,
>>
>>Duncan.
> 
> 
OK.
I just resubcribred to binutils, and downloading the source tree for that.
Next will be gcc.
I'm working with 3.4.2 as my default for cygwin.
Bobby