Re: LTO symtab sections vs. missing symbols (libcalls maybe?) and lto-plugin vs. COFF

2010-10-15 Thread Dave Korn
On 14/10/2010 17:12, Dave Korn wrote: > On 14/10/2010 16:24, Richard Guenther wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Dave Korn >> wrote: >>> I *think* that re-adding the stdlibs after all >>> the new input files in the plugin might work, but haven't tried it yet. It does do the job, and I

Re: LTO symtab sections vs. missing symbols (libcalls maybe?) and lto-plugin vs. COFF

2010-10-15 Thread Dave Korn
On 14/10/2010 19:11, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Dave Korn writes: > >> The consequence of this is that either there are going to be undefined >> symbols in the final executable, or the linker has to perform another round >> of >> library scanning. It occurred to me that the semantics of this mi

rehearsal of GCC Summit tutorial "Easily coding a GCC extension with MELT" (at IRILL, Paris, France oct.20th 2010)

2010-10-15 Thread Basile Starynkevitch
Hello All, [posted to GCC mailing list & to gcc-melt-fre...@googlegroups.com & to various persons] I am giving a tutorial at the GCC Summit in Ottawa about "Easily coding a GCC extension with MELT" on october 26th 2010 (if http://gccsummit.org/ http://www.gccsummit.org/2010/schedule.php is corr