From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11704 invoked by alias); 2 Jan 2003 18:58:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 11656 invoked from network); 2 Jan 2003 18:58:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca) (132.246.100.193) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 2 Jan 2003 18:58:20 -0000 Received: from hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with ESMTP id h02Iw8ot011095; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 13:58:08 -0500 (EST) Received: (from dave@localhost) by hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) id h02Iw70R011094; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 13:58:07 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200301021858.h02Iw70R011094@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Subject: Re: Miscompilation of glibc with CVS mainline To: jakub@redhat.com Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 18:58:00 -0000 From: "John David Anglin" Cc: aj@suse.de, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20030102185332.F1218@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> from "Jakub Jelinek" at Jan 2, 2003 06:53:32 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00055.txt.bz2 > The call is not indirect, it is normal direct call > (even if weak_func is marked __attribute__((weak)) or #pragma weak). Sorry, for the net garbage. My original analysis of the glibc problem involved an indirect call. Dave -- J. David Anglin dave.anglin@nrc.ca National Research Council of Canada (613) 990-0752 (FAX: 952-6605)