From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-87141-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 15413 invoked by alias); 8 Dec 2003 23:17:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 15370 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2003 23:17:13 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO Cantor.suse.de) (195.135.220.2)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 8 Dec 2003 23:17:13 -0000
Received: from Hermes.suse.de (Hermes.suse.de [195.135.221.8])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by Cantor.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id E6BD818BF501; Tue,  9 Dec 2003 00:13:07 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <3FD505BE.2070909@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 23:31:00 -0000
From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini@suse.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Cc: Giovanni Bajo <giovannibajo@libero.it>,
	Gerald Pfeifer <gp@suse.de>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org,
	Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>, Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>
Subject: Re: pthread related breakage (mainline)
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0312081004200.31896@D209.suse.de>	<1070878836.4907.6.camel@ghostwheel>	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0312081238220.31896@D209.suse.de>	<3FD46F41.5080708@suse.de>	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0312081344510.31896@D209.suse.de>	<3FD47580.6030702@suse.de> <021101c3bd8b$8910a8a0$d7bb2997@bagio> <xypzne2syhu.fsf@miranda.boston.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <xypzne2syhu.fsf@miranda.boston.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2003-12/txt/msg00552.txt.bz2

Jason Merrill wrote:

>I think it is--I think your overload patch broke it.  The problem is that
>the #pragma weaks for the pthread functions are now being ignored, because
>handle_pragma_weak expects an affected function to be the
>identifier_global_value of its name, and now it isn't.
>  
>
Ah!

*Many* thanks Jason and sorry Nathanael for having suspected your 
changes... I couldn't imagine an interaction between threads and the C++ 
front end, poor me...

Paolo.