public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/56709] New: Should the passed command parameters result into the same error messages for a configuration test?
@ 2013-03-24 13:34 Markus.Elfring at web dot de
2013-03-24 14:07 ` [Bug c++/56709] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Markus.Elfring at web dot de @ 2013-03-24 13:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56709
Bug #: 56709
Summary: Should the passed command parameters result into the
same error messages for a configuration test?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2013-02/msg00138.html
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: Markus.Elfring@web.de
Host: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Build: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
I try to generate the Luyten release of a library combination with the current
compiler again also on my openSUSE Tumbleweed system.
I wonder about the following results here.
elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/OpalVoip/OPAL/3.10.10> ./configure
--disable-libavcodec
...
checking PTLIB has expat... yes
checking PTLIB has video... no
...
Excerpt from ~/Projekte/OpalVoip/OPAL/3.10.10/config.log:
...
/usr/local/lib64/libpt_s.a(vsdl.o): In function `_GLOBAL__sub_I_vsdl.cxx':
vsdl.cxx:(.text.startup+0x4d): undefined reference to
`PPlugin_PVideoInputDevice_Application_link()'
/usr/local/lib64/libpt_s.a(vfakeio.o): In function
`_GLOBAL__sub_I_vfakeio.cxx':
vfakeio.cxx:(.text.startup+0x4d): undefined reference to
`PPlugin_PVideoInputDevice_Application_link()'
...
elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/OpalVoip/OPAL/Probe> cat Video2.cpp
#define PACKAGE_NAME ""
#define PACKAGE_TARNAME ""
#define PACKAGE_VERSION ""
#define PACKAGE_STRING ""
#define PACKAGE_BUGREPORT ""
#define PACKAGE_URL ""
#define STDC_HEADERS 1
#define OPAL_MAJOR 3
#define OPAL_MINOR 10
#define OPAL_BUILD 10
#define OPAL_VERSION "3.10.10"
#define OPAL_PLUGIN_DIR "/usr/local/lib64/opal-3.10.10"
#define OPAL_PTLIB_SSL 1
#define OPAL_PTLIB_ASN 1
#define OPAL_PTLIB_EXPAT 1
#include <ptbuildopts.h>
#include <ptlib.h>
#include <ptlib/video.h>
int main(void)
{
PVideoChannel vc;
return 0;
}
elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/OpalVoip/OPAL/Probe> LANG=C g++ -o Video2 -Wall
-Wextra -Wstrict-aliasing -Wfloat-equal -Wno-comment -Wno-unused -Winit-self
-Wno-missing-field-initializers -Wreorder -fexceptions -fPIC -DP_64BIT
-DPTRACING=1 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 -I/usr/local/include
-I/usr/include/SDL -L/usr/local/lib64 -lpt_s -lrt -lsasl2 -lldap -llber
-lldap_r -lssl -lcrypto -lexpat -llua -lSDL -lpthread -lodbc -lresolv -ldl
Video2.cpp
/tmp/cc26k0ex.o: In function `main':
Video2.cpp:(.text+0x17): undefined reference to
`PVideoChannel::PVideoChannel()'
Video2.cpp:(.text+0x2b): undefined reference to
`PVideoChannel::~PVideoChannel()'
/tmp/cc26k0ex.o: In function `__static_initialization_and_destruction_0(int,
int)':
Video2.cpp:(.text+0x8c): undefined reference to
`PFactoryLoader::PluginLoaderStartup_link()'
Video2.cpp:(.text+0x97): undefined reference to
`PPlugin_PVideoInputDevice_FakeVideo_link()'
Video2.cpp:(.text+0xa2): undefined reference to
`PPlugin_PVideoInputDevice_Application_link()'
Video2.cpp:(.text+0xad): undefined reference to
`PPlugin_PVideoInputDevice_FFMPEG_link()'
Video2.cpp:(.text+0xb8): undefined reference to
`PPlugin_PVideoInputDevice_YUVFile_link()'
Video2.cpp:(.text+0xc3): undefined reference to
`PPlugin_PVideoOutputDevice_SDL_link()'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
I find it strange that the reduced command parameter set (deletion of
duplicated options and preprocessor symbols) shows differences in the error
messages.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/56709] Should the passed command parameters result into the same error messages for a configuration test?
2013-03-24 13:34 [Bug c++/56709] New: Should the passed command parameters result into the same error messages for a configuration test? Markus.Elfring at web dot de
@ 2013-03-24 14:07 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-03-24 14:08 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-03-24 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56709
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed| |2013-03-24
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-03-24 14:06:46 UTC ---
What is the question? You've only shown one GCC command, what is the other
one?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/56709] Should the passed command parameters result into the same error messages for a configuration test?
2013-03-24 13:34 [Bug c++/56709] New: Should the passed command parameters result into the same error messages for a configuration test? Markus.Elfring at web dot de
2013-03-24 14:07 ` [Bug c++/56709] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-03-24 14:08 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-03-24 14:48 ` Markus.Elfring at web dot de
2013-03-24 14:59 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-03-24 14:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56709
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-03-24 14:08:53 UTC ---
Bugzilla is not the right place for this, if you'd asked a real question and
provided both commands when you sent it to gcc-help you might have got an
answer. Please follow up on the mailing list.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/56709] Should the passed command parameters result into the same error messages for a configuration test?
2013-03-24 13:34 [Bug c++/56709] New: Should the passed command parameters result into the same error messages for a configuration test? Markus.Elfring at web dot de
2013-03-24 14:07 ` [Bug c++/56709] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-03-24 14:08 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-03-24 14:48 ` Markus.Elfring at web dot de
2013-03-24 14:59 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Markus.Elfring at web dot de @ 2013-03-24 14:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56709
Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring at web dot de> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID |
--- Comment #3 from Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring at web dot de> 2013-03-24 14:48:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> What is the question?
1. Why do I get error messages about "undefined references" here?
2. Should the shown commands be equivalent?
> You've only shown one GCC command, what is the other one?
>From ~/Projekte/OpalVoip/OPAL/3.10.10/config.log:
configure:6101: g++ -o conftest -Wall -Wextra -Wstrict-aliasing -Wfloat-equal
-Wno-comment -Wno-unused -Winit-self -Wno-missing-field-initializers -DP_64BIT
-DPTRACING=1 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 -fexceptions -I/usr/local/include
-I/usr/include/SDL -felide-constructors -Wreorder -fPIC -DP_64BIT
-DPTRACING=1 -D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 -fexceptions -I/usr/local/include
-I/usr/include/SDL -felide-constructors -Wreorder -DP_64BIT -DPTRACING=1
-D_REENTRANT -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 -fexceptions -I/usr/local/include
-I/usr/include/SDL conftest.cpp -L/usr/local/lib64 -lpt_s -lrt -lsasl2
-lldap -llber -lldap_r -lssl -lcrypto -lexpat -llua -lSDL -lpthread -lodbc
-lresolv -ldl >&5
(In reply to comment #2)
It seems that no other software developer was interested so far to add
constructive feedback for this issue on the mailing list.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/56709] Should the passed command parameters result into the same error messages for a configuration test?
2013-03-24 13:34 [Bug c++/56709] New: Should the passed command parameters result into the same error messages for a configuration test? Markus.Elfring at web dot de
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-03-24 14:48 ` Markus.Elfring at web dot de
@ 2013-03-24 14:59 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-03-24 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56709
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-03-24 14:59:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> It seems that no other software developer was interested so far to add
> constructive feedback for this issue on the mailing list.
So ping the list again, bugzilla is not the right place to ask questions.
As I said, your question was unclear, you asked why there's a difference
between two commands and only show one command. Noone's going to waste their
time trying to answer you if your question is unclear and can't be understood.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-03-24 14:59 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-03-24 13:34 [Bug c++/56709] New: Should the passed command parameters result into the same error messages for a configuration test? Markus.Elfring at web dot de
2013-03-24 14:07 ` [Bug c++/56709] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-03-24 14:08 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-03-24 14:48 ` Markus.Elfring at web dot de
2013-03-24 14:59 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).