* [Bug ada/42554] Can't build GNAT tools
2009-12-30 18:25 [Bug ada/42554] New: Can't build gnatlink, gnatmake simon at pushface dot org
@ 2010-02-02 6:26 ` simon at pushface dot org
2010-02-02 13:11 ` simon at pushface dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: simon at pushface dot org @ 2010-02-02 6:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from simon at pushface dot org 2010-02-02 06:26 -------
It's much worse than that..
Aside from the other object file which triggers the same bug, the make of
gnatlink and gnatmake calls in libgnat.a twice.
And when you build the other GNAT tools, it calls in all the Ada-derived RTS
object files explicitly as well as libgnat.a. I did try deleting them, but (a)
the C-derived object files are required, (b) that would mean rebuilding the
entire RTS for the smallest change. So I reorganised the bind/link not to call
in libgnat.a; to do that you need a libgnatc.a for the C-derived object files.
So far so good; but now 'make check-ada' fails for every test in exactly the
same way!
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-01/msg01596.html (also referenced in
comment #4) for the last attempt at this approach (NB it has one error, see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-02/msg00005.html).
I agree my latest patch here is rather global, but Fortran builds fine and
'make check-fortran' is only showing XFAILs. I can probably make an
alternative, restricted to Ada only, might stand more chance of being accepted.
--
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary|Can't build gnatlink, |Can't build GNAT tools
|gnatmake |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42554
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/42554] Can't build GNAT tools
2009-12-30 18:25 [Bug ada/42554] New: Can't build gnatlink, gnatmake simon at pushface dot org
2010-02-02 6:26 ` [Bug ada/42554] Can't build GNAT tools simon at pushface dot org
@ 2010-02-02 13:11 ` simon at pushface dot org
2010-02-02 21:25 ` simon at pushface dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: simon at pushface dot org @ 2010-02-02 13:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from simon at pushface dot org 2010-02-02 13:10 -------
I've traced where the 'ranlib -c' switch was introduced: at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-12/msg01183.html .
The original purpose of this patch was to fix g77 regressions, and we now pass
check-fortran without it, so I think there's some evidence for removing it.
Of course, other languages might rely on this switch ...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42554
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/42554] Can't build GNAT tools
2009-12-30 18:25 [Bug ada/42554] New: Can't build gnatlink, gnatmake simon at pushface dot org
2010-02-02 6:26 ` [Bug ada/42554] Can't build GNAT tools simon at pushface dot org
2010-02-02 13:11 ` simon at pushface dot org
@ 2010-02-02 21:25 ` simon at pushface dot org
2010-02-02 22:55 ` howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu
` (3 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: simon at pushface dot org @ 2010-02-02 21:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #10 from simon at pushface dot org 2010-02-02 21:25 -------
(In reply to comment #7)
> Why not remove the duplicate linkage of s-secsta.o in gnatlink and gnatmake?
> There is no reason to link it in a second time since it is already in
> libgnat.a.
I agree we could tidy up ada/gcc-interface/Makefile but (after removing the
ranlib -c flag) it's not necessary to resolve this problem.
And no amount of tinkering with this Makefile will fix the problem with 'make
check-ada'.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42554
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/42554] Can't build GNAT tools
2009-12-30 18:25 [Bug ada/42554] New: Can't build gnatlink, gnatmake simon at pushface dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2010-02-02 21:25 ` simon at pushface dot org
@ 2010-02-02 22:55 ` howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu
2010-02-03 21:24 ` simon at pushface dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu @ 2010-02-02 22:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #11 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-02-02 22:55 -------
Building gcc trunk with...
Index: configure
===================================================================
--- configure (revision 156440)
+++ configure (working copy)
@@ -7292,7 +7292,7 @@
extra_arflags_for_target=" -X32_64"
extra_nmflags_for_target=" -B -X32_64"
;;
- *-*-darwin*)
+ *-*-darwin[89]*)
# ranlib from Darwin requires the -c flag to look at common symbols.
extra_ranlibflags_for_target=" -c"
;;
on x86_64-apple-darwin10 doesn't produce any regressions...
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-02/msg00168.html
I am checking with Mike Stump but I suspect that the requirement of -c with
ranlib
is a depreciated 'feature' from earlier Xcode. In particular, the comments in
the ranlib
manpage on darwin10....
-c Include common symbols as definitions with respect to the table
of contents. This is seldom the intended behavior for linking
from a library, as it forces the linking of a library member
just because it uses an uninitialized global that is undefined
at that point in the linking. This option is included only
because this was the original behavior of ranlib. This option
is not the default.
suggest that this is feature being depreciated out.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42554
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/42554] Can't build GNAT tools
2009-12-30 18:25 [Bug ada/42554] New: Can't build gnatlink, gnatmake simon at pushface dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2010-02-02 22:55 ` howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu
@ 2010-02-03 21:24 ` simon at pushface dot org
2010-03-19 10:20 ` mrs at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-05-17 12:07 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: simon at pushface dot org @ 2010-02-03 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from simon at pushface dot org 2010-02-03 21:24 -------
I re-ran the tests just for Ada; results at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-02/msg00265.html .
Looking good - there is a problem with the ACATS tests, but I have a feeling
it's some sort of race condition in the test suite (for info, not a dejagnu
suite).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42554
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/42554] Can't build GNAT tools
2009-12-30 18:25 [Bug ada/42554] New: Can't build gnatlink, gnatmake simon at pushface dot org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2010-02-03 21:24 ` simon at pushface dot org
@ 2010-03-19 10:20 ` mrs at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-05-17 12:07 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: mrs at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-03-19 10:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #13 from mrs at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-19 10:20 -------
Subject: Bug 42554
Author: mrs
Date: Fri Mar 19 10:19:52 2010
New Revision: 157563
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157563
Log:
PR ada/42554
* configure.ac: Only pass -c to ranlib for darwin9 and earlier.
* configure: Regenerate.
Modified:
trunk/ChangeLog
trunk/configure
trunk/configure.ac
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42554
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug ada/42554] Can't build GNAT tools
2009-12-30 18:25 [Bug ada/42554] New: Can't build gnatlink, gnatmake simon at pushface dot org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2010-03-19 10:20 ` mrs at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-05-17 12:07 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-05-17 12:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #14 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-17 12:07 -------
Appears to be fixed. Please reopen if that's not the case.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42554
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread