On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Jonathan Wakely wrote:

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Jonathan Wakely wrote:

On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 12:20:16PM +0200, Christian Joensson wrote:

On 7/12/05, Christian Joensson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/12/05, Eric Botcazou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Joe Buck reports the same problems on SPARC/Solaris:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-07/msg00633.html

According to my testing, the fix is to upgrade to GNU Binutils 2.16 or
2.16.1.

you wouldn't happen to know if binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2-2.1 (from fedora
core development) would suffice? or anyone else??

or even binutils-2.15.92.0.2-5.1 from fedora core 3 updates?

That version works for me on x86_64.

The minimum binutils for libstdc++ is now 2.15.90.0.1.1, I don't know
about the rest of GCC.

does this also apply to other than sparc platforms? I'm cunfused by your

I believe that version applies to x86 linux and x86-64 linux.  I don't
know about Sparc linux.  The only hard fact I can confirm first-hand is
that the latest binutils from FC3 updates works for me on x86_64.

Interesting! Please have a look at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-07/msg00602.html

those are test results from 4.0.1 release compiled on debian 3.1/AMD64 (pure64 bit). This debian is using binutils 2.15:

silence:~$ as --version
GNU assembler 2.15
Copyright 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of
the GNU General Public License.  This program has absolutely no warranty.
This assembler was configured for a target of `x86_64-linux'.
silence:~$

silence:~$ ld --version
GNU ld version 2.15
Copyright 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of
the GNU General Public License.  This program has absolutely no warranty.
silence:~$

and IMHO testresults look quite good except abi_check, don't they? i.e. do you mean updating binutils will resolve abi_check issue in libstdc++ testsuite?

Thanks,
Karel
--
Karel Gardas                  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ObjectSecurity Ltd.           http://www.objectsecurity.com

Reply via email to