On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
> The following patch fixes this for me, maybe other target library dependencies
> should be added too.
>
> that would be for
> libgfortran on libquadmath, libgcc
> libsanitizer on libstdc++
> libstdc++ on libgomp, libgcc
> libjava o
Am 19.12.2012 01:28, schrieb Ian Lance Taylor:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 12/18/2012 02:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>>> Argh. But why? Wouldn't that only apply to cases where the lock was
>>> sometimes locked by one library and sometimes locked by a diff
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 12/18/2012 02:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> Argh. But why? Wouldn't that only apply to cases where the lock was
>> sometimes locked by one library and sometimes locked by a different
>> one?
>
> Or did you really mean
>
> "...
On 12/18/2012 02:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Argh. But why? Wouldn't that only apply to cases where the lock was
> sometimes locked by one library and sometimes locked by a different
> one?
Or did you really mean
"... only apply to cases where the memory protected by the lock
was visi
On 12/18/2012 02:52 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Argh. But why? Wouldn't that only apply to cases where the lock was
> sometimes locked by one library and sometimes locked by a different
> one?
If two copies of the library aren't looking at the same lock object,
then the lock does no actual loc
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 12/18/2012 02:09 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> I have now committed this follow-on patch, to make libgo use the new
>> libatomic_convenience library. This means that the changes to
>> explicitly link against -latomic are no longer ne
On 12/18/2012 02:09 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> I have now committed this follow-on patch, to make libgo use the new
> libatomic_convenience library. This means that the changes to
> explicitly link against -latomic are no longer necessary.
Hang on, what are we doing here. Are we linking libat
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 12/18/2012 11:30 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> 2012-12-18 Ian Lance Taylor
>>
>> PR go/55201
>> * Makefile.am (noinst_LTLIBRARIES): Define new make variable.
>> (libatomic_convenience_la_SOURCES): Likewise.
>>
On 12/18/2012 11:30 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> 2012-12-18 Ian Lance Taylor
>
> PR go/55201
> * Makefile.am (noinst_LTLIBRARIES): Define new make variable.
> (libatomic_convenience_la_SOURCES): Likewise.
> (libatomic_convenience_la_LIBADD): Likewise.
> * Makefile
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>
> This doesn't happen for me, and it's bizarre that libtool would turn a
> link against ../libatomic/libatomic.la into a link against -latomic.
> But in any case the fix is presumably going to be to add a convenience
> library for libatomi
10 matches
Mail list logo
