From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7729 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2011 03:23:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 7721 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jul 2011 03:23:47 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 03:23:29 +0000 Received: (qmail 7863 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2011 03:23:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.2.2?) (sandra@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 25 Jul 2011 03:23:28 -0000 Message-ID: <4E2CE18A.3030905@codesourcery.com> Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 04:45:00 -0000 From: Sandra Loosemore User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H.J. Lu" CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: PING^2 Re: PATCH: fix collect2 handling of --demangle and --no-demangle References: <4DFBE75A.6010405@codesourcery.com> <4E1B36CB.7030006@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-07/txt/msg02103.txt.bz2 On 07/24/2011 08:09 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 7:03 PM, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Sandra Loosemore >> wrote: >>> >>>> 2011-06-17 Sandra Loosemore >>>> >>>> gcc/ >>>> * configure.ac (demangler_in_ld): Default to yes. >>>> * configure: Regenerated. >>>> * collect2.c (main): When HAVE_LD_DEMANGLE is defined, don't >>>> mess with COLLECT_NO_DEMANGLE, and just pass --demangle and >>>> --no-demangle options straight through to ld. When >>>> HAVE_LD_DEMANGLE is not defined, set COLLECT_NO_DEMANGLE in a >>>> way that has the intended effect on Windows. >> >> It caused: >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49835 > > I checked in this as an obvious fix. Oops! Sorry about that. I thought I had fixed that problem. :-( -Sandra