[Bug libstdc++/52456] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check

2012-03-10 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|

[Bug libstdc++/52456] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check

2012-03-10 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456 --- Comment #9 from John David Anglin 2012-03-10 22:57:49 UTC --- Author: danglin Date: Sat Mar 10 22:57:45 2012 New Revision: 185185 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185185 Log: PR libstdc++/52456 * config/abi/post/

[Bug libstdc++/52456] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check

2012-03-10 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456 --- Comment #8 from John David Anglin 2012-03-10 21:23:55 UTC --- Author: danglin Date: Sat Mar 10 21:23:51 2012 New Revision: 185181 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=185181 Log: PR libstdc++/52456 * config/abi/post/

[Bug libstdc++/52456] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check

2012-03-09 Thread bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456 --- Comment #7 from Benjamin Kosnik 2012-03-09 18:46:52 UTC --- Hey all. Undesignated are optionally-added symbols (like tls) that are configure or platform dependant and so are not set into the baselines. This is new. They are not FAIL. It's t

[Bug libstdc++/52456] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check

2012-03-02 Thread dave.anglin at bell dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456 --- Comment #6 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-03-03 00:05:34 UTC --- On 2-Mar-12, at 11:47 AM, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote: > And the undesignated symbols are...? Is the issue recent? Attached is the symbol diff. The undesignat

[Bug libstdc++/52456] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check

2012-03-02 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456 --- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2012-03-02 17:03:22 UTC --- (by the way, while we are at it, on x86_64-linux I also currently have 1 , no FAIL, when building --enable-libstdcxx-time=rt, I suppose it's fine)

[Bug libstdc++/52456] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check

2012-03-02 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456 --- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2012-03-02 17:00:17 UTC --- Indeed (sorry) the "troublesome" (ie, leading to FAIL) symbols seem the ones, on x86_64-linux too we have two and no FAIL.

[Bug libstdc++/52456] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check

2012-03-02 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org, ro

[Bug libstdc++/52456] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check

2012-03-02 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456 --- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-03-02 16:56:23 UTC --- > --- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini > 2012-03-02 16:47:44 UTC --- > And the undesignated symbols are...? Is the issue recent? I suppose the symbols are from GLIB

[Bug libstdc++/52456] FAIL: libstdc++-abi/abi_check

2012-03-02 Thread paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52456 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ro at CeBiTec dot |