From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11606 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2002 22:06:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 11582 invoked by uid 71); 22 Feb 2002 22:06:01 -0000 Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 14:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020222220601.11578.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: ro@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Rainer Orth Subject: Re: target/5505: Doubts about a patch for OSF Reply-To: Rainer Orth X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00577.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR target/5505; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Rainer Orth To: Richard.Kreckel@Uni-Mainz.DE Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: target/5505: Doubts about a patch for OSF Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 23:04:01 +0100 (MET) Richard B. Kreckel writes: > Err, while trying to debug into the problem I discovered something > that had escaped my attantion until now: compiling CLN and an example > (examples/e, or tests/tests or whatever, never mind) with either -O1, -O2 > or -O1 -g resulted in a working test (the linker warnings are of course > still present) while -O2 -fno-exceptions produced a crashing program. > Also, these funny warnings: > as1: Warning: /tmp/ccb8ZbYD.s, line 6: macro instruction used $at > appear only when I disable exceptions. I hadn't noticed it so far because > I *always* export CXXFLAGS="-O2 -fno-exceptions" prior to building > CLN. May I ask you how you configured and tested CLN? You did not > specify -fno-exceptions, did you? Does it work when you do so? I get those warnings and crashing test programs only when configuring with CXXFLAGS='-fno-exceptions' CPPFLAGS="-DNO_ASM -DNO_PROVIDE_REQUIRE" \ ./configure --disable-shared --without-gmp CXXFLAGS=-fno-exceptions alone still works. > Anyways, here is a g++ -v output as you requested: Thanks, nothing unusual here. Rainer