From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21663 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 2008 12:12:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 21335 invoked by uid 48); 22 Oct 2008 12:11:28 -0000 Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 12:12:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20081022121128.21334.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/37241] [4.4 Regression]: FAIL: g++.dg/abi/key2.C In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg01433.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-22 12:11 ------- That sounds just too strict testcase matching, not expecting any kind of reordering and .section directives not necessarily being emitted if an object is emitted in the same section as the previous one. FYI, on a x86_64-linux -> powerpc64-darwin cross, I see: .globl __ZTV1f .weak_definition __ZTV1f .section __TEXT,__const_coal,coalesced ... .globl __ZTI1f .weak_definition __ZTI1f ... .globl __ZTS1f .weak_definition __ZTS1f (all in the same section and __TEXT used everywhere, not __DATA). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37241