From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9226 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2009 01:03:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 7154 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2009 01:03:03 -0000 Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 01:03:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20090429010303.7153.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug libstdc++/39491] [4.2/4.3 regression] symbol __signbitl@GLIBCXX_3.4 in libstdc++ exported In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca" 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: 2009-04/txt/msg02827.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #31 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-04-29 01:03 ------- Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3 regression] symbol __signbitl@GLIBCXX_3.4 in libstdc++ exported > Also, libstdc++.so is definitely not the right home for __signbitl symbol, so > we definitely shouldn't allow any newly linked program to use symbol from that > library. If __signbitl is ever needed (prove it), then it belongs to libc.so > and libm.so, not into libstdc++.so. I agree. Further, the implementation that leaked in 4.2 and 4.3 may have been broken since it assumed a 128-bit long double format. Dave -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39491