From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22620 invoked by alias); 10 Mar 2002 22:34:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 22543 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2002 22:34:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO igw3.watson.ibm.com) (198.81.209.18) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Mar 2002 22:34:29 -0000 Received: from sp1n293en1.watson.ibm.com (sp1n293en1.watson.ibm.com [9.2.112.57]) by igw3.watson.ibm.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g2AMYFG11156; Sun, 10 Mar 2002 17:34:15 -0500 Received: from makai.watson.ibm.com (makai.watson.ibm.com [9.2.216.144]) by sp1n293en1.watson.ibm.com (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g2AMYFM26984; Sun, 10 Mar 2002 17:34:15 -0500 Received: from watson.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by makai.watson.ibm.com (AIX4.3/8.9.3/8.9.3/01-10-2000) with ESMTP id RAA17934; Sun, 10 Mar 2002 17:34:14 -0500 Message-Id: <200203102234.RAA17934@makai.watson.ibm.com> To: Andrew Cagney cc: Alan Modra , Richard Henderson , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: f build dies with: undefined reference to `lookup_name' In-Reply-To: Message from Andrew Cagney of "Sun, 10 Mar 2002 17:27:50 EST." <3C8BDDE6.7020104@mac.com> Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 14:34:00 -0000 From: David Edelsohn X-SW-Source: 2002-03/txt/msg00535.txt.bz2 >>>>> Andrew Cagney writes: Andrew> How is this patch going? We have two proposed patches: Alan's patch moving the weak support for pushdecl and Richard's proposal to move the current weak support from varasm.c to c-common.c. Alan has not commented on Richard's proposal and Richard has not commented on Alan's proposal. Moving the weak machinery to c-common seems like a good shift to me because it is self-containted and pragma weak is C/C++/Obj-C specific. David