[Bug bootstrap/65522] [5 Regression] Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap - ../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle': cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8): multiple definition of `ada_demangle' ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c:(.text+0x863): first defined here

[Bug bootstrap/65522] [5 Regression] Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap - ../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle': cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8): multiple definition of `ada_demangle' ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c:(.text+0x863): first defined here

[rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65522

Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Priority|P3                          |P1
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-03-23
                 CC|                            |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
   Target Milestone|---                         |5.0
            Summary|Svn revision 221590 fails   |[5 Regression] Svn revision
                   |bootstrap -                 |221590 fails bootstrap -
                   |../libiberty/libiberty.a(cp |../libiberty/libiberty.a(cp
                   |lus-dem.o): In function     |lus-dem.o): In function
                   |`ada_demangle':             |`ada_demangle':
                   |cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8):  |cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8):
                   |multiple definition of      |multiple definition of
                   |`ada_demangle'              |`ada_demangle'
                   |ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c |ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c
                   |:(.text+0x863): first       |:(.text+0x863): first
                   |defined here                |defined here
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Confirmed by Andreas.

[Bug bootstrap/65522] [5 Regression] Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap - ../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle': cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8): multiple definition of `ada_demangle' ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c:(.text+0x863): first defined here

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65522

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 35109
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35109&action=edit
gcc5-pr65522.patch

Seems the ada/adadecode.[ch] (ada_demangle) function is totally unused.

[Bug bootstrap/65522] [5 Regression] Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap - ../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle': cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8): multiple definition of `ada_demangle' ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c:(.text+0x863): first defined here

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65522

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |charlet at gcc dot gnu.org,
                   |                            |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
           Assignee|jakub at gcc dot gnu.org           |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Ah, except ada_demangle is also exported from libgnat*.so - wonder why the RTS
is built with IN_GCC.
In that case, guess the Ada folks need to decide which one of the two to keep,
and/or if one of them (either adadecode.[ch], or {include,libiberty}/* one
shouldn't be renamed to something else.
I haven't found any uses of either of those, except the libiberty demangler
that calls ada_demangle but it could very well call a static routine instead.

[Bug bootstrap/65522] [5 Regression] Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap - ../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle': cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8): multiple definition of `ada_demangle' ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c:(.text+0x863): first defined here

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65522

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |NEW
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug bootstrap/65522] [5 Regression] Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap - ../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle': cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8): multiple definition of `ada_demangle' ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c:(.text+0x863): first defined here

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65522

--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> Ah, except ada_demangle is also exported from libgnat*.so - wonder why the
> RTS is built with IN_GCC.

This is explained in gcc-interface/Makefile.in.

> In that case, guess the Ada folks need to decide which one of the two to
> keep, and/or if one of them (either adadecode.[ch], or {include,libiberty}/*
> one shouldn't be renamed to something else.

I think your patch is fine, but I'll let Arno approve it.

[Bug bootstrap/65522] [5 Regression] Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap - ../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle': cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8): multiple definition of `ada_demangle' ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c:(.text+0x863): first defined here

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65522

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #35109|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
           Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org      |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 35112
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35112&action=edit
gcc5-pr65522.patch

I'm actually testing a slightly adjusted variant that keeps the compatibility
ada_demangle in libgnat* for ABI reasons, but not in gnat1 which doesn't use it
and thus can link against libiberty.

[Bug bootstrap/65522] [5 Regression] Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap - ../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle': cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8): multiple definition of `ada_demangle' ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c:(.text+0x863): first defined here

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65522

--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Mar 23 15:49:02 2015
New Revision: 221599

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221599&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
    PR bootstrap/65522
    * ipa-devirt.c: Remove duplicate demangle.h include.

    * adadecode.c (ada_demangle): Guard with IN_RTS instead of IN_GCC.

Modified:
    trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/ada/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/ada/adadecode.c
    trunk/gcc/ipa-devirt.c

[Bug bootstrap/65522] [5 Regression] Svn revision 221590 fails bootstrap - ../libiberty/libiberty.a(cplus-dem.o): In function `ada_demangle': cplus-dem.c:(.text+0xdb8): multiple definition of `ada_demangle' ada/adadecode.o:adadecode.c:(.text+0x863): first defined here

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65522

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.