> .init_array is used by newer versions of gcc to serve the same purpose as > .ctors, > but using a different mechanism to run constructor code. Similarly for > .fini_array. > At a guess, your code is making assumptions about the order in which > destructors > are run. If you google for "g++ static destructor order" you'll find lots of > other people with the same problem.
Ok thanks. It's not just destructors though, since we have at least one test suite that starts to act weird part way into its execution. I assume this has something to do with the order that ctors are run in. Without having had time to do any more digging, I find it a bit odd that a hashmap at file scope that was never written to could be affected by the order in which ctors are run. As long as it got constructed properly at *some* point, I can't see what else could go wrong. But hopefully it'll be come more clear when I get time to dig deeper. I'll definitely do some googling now that I know what to google for. Thanks, Doug _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
