Hi,
yes I'm aware of the problematic of common and unfortunately I'm stuck
with handling it in a similar way to gcc, due to similar constraints
regarding legacy code.
Best,
-Bernhard
Am Di., 29. Jan. 2019 um 11:24 Uhr schrieb David Brown :
>
> Hi,
>
> You have to make sure you understand the sta
Hi,
You have to make sure you understand the standards here, not just copy
what gcc does. In some aspects, gcc does what it always has done,
rather than what it should do (from the point of view of following the
standards, or for helping developers write correct code). The whole
concept of
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:09:35AM +0100, Bernhard Schommer wrote:
> Thanks for the fast answer, sorry if I posted this on the wrong list.
> Actually I was looking at this not due to changes in my code but
> rather to implement the option for another compiler and I wanted to
> mimic the behavior of
Thanks for the fast answer, sorry if I posted this on the wrong list.
Actually I was looking at this not due to changes in my code but
rather to implement the option for another compiler and I wanted to
mimic the behavior of gcc and was kind of confused in the change of
behavior.
Bernhard.
Am Di.
On 28/01/2019 16:58, Bernhard Schommer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to know if the handling of the option -fno-common has
> changed between version 7.3 and 8.2 for x86. I tried it with the
> default system version of OpenSUSE and for example:
>
> const int i;
>
> is placed in the .bss section.
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 4:59 PM Bernhard Schommer
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to know if the handling of the option -fno-common has
> changed between version 7.3 and 8.2 for x86. I tried it with the
> default system version of OpenSUSE and for example:
>
> const int i;
>
> is placed in the .bs
> On 28 Jan 2019, at 15:58, Bernhard Schommer
> wrote:
>
> I would like to know if the handling of the option -fno-common has
> changed between version 7.3 and 8.2 for x86. I tried it with the
> default system version of OpenSUSE and for example:
>
> const int i;
>
> is placed in the .bss se
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 07:33:53PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
> Is the manual wording just slightly vague here, and both .data and .bss
> are regarded as covered by the phrase "the data section of the object file"?
Yes.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC
