From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-54564-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 15543 invoked by alias); 6 Mar 2002 23:13:43 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15450 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2002 23:13:40 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO potter.sfbay.redhat.com) (209.249.29.60)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Mar 2002 23:13:40 -0000
Received: from dot.sfbay.redhat.com (dot.sfbay.redhat.com [205.180.230.224])
	by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g26N8Fh02797;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:08:15 -0800
Received: (from rth@localhost)
	by dot.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g26NDek08473;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:13:40 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: dot.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 15:13:00 -0000
From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
To: David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Cagney <cagney@mac.com>, Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>,
   gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: f build dies with: undefined reference to `lookup_name'
Message-ID: <20020306151340.A8470@redhat.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>,
	David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>, Andrew Cagney <cagney@mac.com>,
	Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
References: <rth@redhat.com> <200203062309.SAA28674@makai.watson.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <200203062309.SAA28674@makai.watson.ibm.com>; from dje@watson.ibm.com on Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 06:09:36PM -0500
X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00300.txt.bz2

On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 06:09:36PM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> Richard> No, the *entire* processing of #pragma weak should be moved.
> 
> 	I don't mean move everything.

I do.

> weak_finish walks weak_decls list.

Yes.

> We now need to walk the list outside varasm.c which means that the list
> head cannot be static.

No, it means all of

	weak_decls
	mark_weak_decls
	add_weak
	weak_finish
	remove_from_pending_weak_list

should be moved and/or rewritten for c-common.c.


r~