Re: Bug#148651: gcc 3.1-2 patch breaks binutils builds
On Fri, 31 May 2002, Jack Howarth wrote:
> Package: gcc-3.1
> Version: 3.1-2
>
> In rebuilding binutils 2.12.90.0.7-1 with gcc-3.1-2 on debian ppc sid
> I discovered that this causes binutils to have a new unexpected failure
> in its testsuite...
>
> Running /home/howarth/debian-binutils/binutils-2.12.90.0.7/build-tree/binutils-2
> .12.90.0.7/ld/testsuite/ld-srec/srec.exp ...
> PASS: S-records
> FAIL: S-records with constructors
>
> It appears the origin of this problem is the use of the
> g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch patch in the build of gcc-3.1. This
> patch is not used in the RedHat gcc 3.1 srpms. If I rebuild
> gcc-3.1-2 with the g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch patch disabled and
> then install that gcc-3.1-2 and rebuild binutils 2.12.90.0.7
> (or 2.12.90.0.9) I find that the unexpected binutils failure
> has disappeared from the testsuite results. I have forwarded
> this information to HJ Lu so he can look into whether the
> use g++-cxa-atexit.dpatch breakage is due to a bug in gcc
> or binutils. For now unless there is a pressing reason to use
> it we should disable that patch.
Whoa! This is not a breakage nor have I confirmed that it is a real
failure of the test at all. It just appears that the flags passed to the
linker are insufficient for this test given the atexit patch. It is VERY
likely that this test will still pass, given that ld links the test binary
against the proper libraries, but the test as written upstream does not
take the atexit situation into account.
PLEASE do not jump to conclusions about testsuite failures in gcc, glibc,
or binutils. In many of the cases that I've seen so far, it's not that
the test fails because there's something wrong with the toolchain...it's
usually been because the build environment doesn't exactly match a
typical RedHat system (the locale thing with gcc is a perfect example).
I'm closing this until I can look into the s-rec w/constructors failure a
bit more to find out if the test is really failing or not. FYI, it's
only a linking failure due to unresolved symbols, not because the
conditions that the testcase is supposed to test are causing it to
fail. This situation is akin to walking into an exam that requires
that you use a pencil for the grading machine to be able to read your
answer selections, but you only have a pen -- your answers may still be
correct, but it needs to be hand-graded.
C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: