Re: target/10440: [cygwin] incorrect assembler produced (as fails with "is already defined")

Re: target/10440: [cygwin] incorrect assembler produced (as fails with "is already defined")

[bangerth]

Synopsis: [cygwin] incorrect assembler produced (as fails with "is already defined")

State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
State-Changed-By: bangerth
State-Changed-When: Tue Apr 22 23:06:28 2003
State-Changed-Why:
    Will not be fixed on 3.2 branch any more, and fixed on 3.3
    and mainline

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=10440

Re: target/10440: [cygwin] incorrect assembler produced (as fails with "is already defined")

[Giovanni Bajo]

The following reply was made to PR target/10440; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: "Giovanni Bajo" <giovannibajo@libero.it>
To: <mlt@bredband.net>,
	<gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>,
	<gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>,
	<nobody@gcc.gnu.org>,
	<gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: "Wolfgang Bangerth" <bangerth@ices.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: target/10440: [cygwin] incorrect assembler produced (as fails with "is already defined")
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 15:52:59 +0200

 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&p
 r=10440
 
 Reduced snippet is:
 --------------------------------
 typedef struct
 {
    int dummy;
 } Foo;
 
 __attribute__((dllimport)) Foo issue_error_1;
 __attribute__((dllimport)) Foo issue_error_2;
 __attribute__((dllimport)) Foo issue_error_3;
 __attribute__((dllimport)) Foo f;
 
 void func(void)
 {
     other_func(f);
 }
 
 Foo f = {};
 --------------------------------
 /cygdrive/c/DOCUME~1/ADMINI~1/IMPOST~1/Temp/ccHvVfGR.s: Assembler messages:
 /cygdrive/c/DOCUME~1/ADMINI~1/IMPOST~1/Temp/ccHvVfGR.s:21: Error: symbol
 `_D' is already defined
 /cygdrive/c/DOCUME~1/ADMINI~1/IMPOST~1/Temp/ccHvVfGR.s:22: Error: symbol
 `_D' is already defined
 /cygdrive/c/DOCUME~1/ADMINI~1/IMPOST~1/Temp/ccHvVfGR.s:23: Error: symbol
 `_D' is already defined
 
 Funny thing is that we get one error for each symbol we declare above (I
 declared 3 and got three errors).
 
 This bug is a regression of the 3.2 branch only. It's fixed on 3.3 and 3.4
 with Mark's patch for pr/7910, but I read that the patch has been reverted.
 I did not understand though if another patch has been prepared or not. GCC
 3.3 build from a CVS snapshot of yesterday can compile it correctly.
 
 Giovanni Bajo