From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-61753-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 15575 invoked by alias); 16 Oct 2002 17:47:50 -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 15548 invoked from network); 16 Oct 2002 17:47:47 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out1.apple.com) (17.254.0.52)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Oct 2002 17:47:47 -0000
Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (A17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225])
	by mail-out1.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g9GHlli09837
	for <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 10:47:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scv3.apple.com (scv3.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com
 (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id <T5df9398a2a118064e1570@mailgate1.apple.com>;
 Wed, 16 Oct 2002 10:47:36 -0700
Received: from apple.com (johada5.apple.com [17.201.20.185])
	by scv3.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g9GHlkO02291;
	Wed, 16 Oct 2002 10:47:46 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 11:48:00 -0000
Subject: Re: Problems building GNAT on OS X with top-of-tree
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546)
Cc: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
To: Geert Bosch <bosch@gnat.com>
From: Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com>
In-Reply-To: <018AA0A0-E12E-11D6-A8D0-00039344BF4A@gnat.com>
Message-Id: <5633C06A-E12F-11D6-B07C-000393D76DAA@apple.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00977.txt.bz2


On Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 10:37  AM, Geert Bosch wrote:

>
> On Wednesday, Oct 16, 2002, at 13:12 America/New_York, Dale Johannesen 
> wrote:
>> Another possibility is that
>> L_system__soft_links__get_jmpbuf_address$non_lazy_ptr
>> is not defined.  In either case I'd expect to see an "undefined 
>> symbol"
>> message from the assembler though.  If neither of those is it, send me
>> a .s file and I'll figure it out.
>
> It's defined in the .data segment, while the reference is in the .code
> segment. I can see how this wouldn't work...

No, that is supposed to be OK.  non_lazy_ptr's are used for
references to the address of a function (pointer-to-function) like this:

extern int (*f)(int (*)());
main() {
    (*f)(f);
}

.text   ....
_main:  ....
         bcl 20,31,L1$pb
L1$pb:   ....
         addis r9,r31,ha16(L_f$non_lazy_ptr-L1$pb)
         lwz r11,lo16(L_f$non_lazy_ptr-L1$pb)(r9)
         addis r9,r31,ha16(L_f$non_lazy_ptr-L1$pb)
         lwz r9,lo16(L_f$non_lazy_ptr-L1$pb)(r9)
         lwz r0,0(r11)
         lwz r3,0(r9)
         mr r12,r0
         mtctr r12
         bctrl
         ....
.data
.non_lazy_symbol_pointer
L_f$non_lazy_ptr:
         .indirect_symbol _f

So what's different about yours?