This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: solaris27 + libstdc++-v3 + -static == core in ctype_char_members.c
On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 01:12:54PM -0500, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 10:00:47 -0800
> From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
>
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 12:41:40PM -0500, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 08:32:02 -0800
> > From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 01, 2000 at 02:55:48PM -0800, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm using the 2.9.1 binutils release with the gcc-2.95.2 sources. I've
> > > updated libtool to be 1.3.4 but that doesn't seem to make a
> >
> > I won't use binutils 2.9.1 for anything. It is so buggy, especially
> > on Sparc/ELF.
> >
> > H.J. seems to like to make extreme statements like this. Please try
> > to ignore them. He does a disservice to the free software community
> > by spreading FUD without referring to actual facts.
>
> This is from the Solaris/Sparc bug report on Aug. 3, 1999:
>
> ---
> I've sent this already to gcc-bugs and bug-gnu-utils. It is
> currently not possible to compile gcc-2.9.5 with the official
> binutils 2.9.1. The switch jump tables in their own subsections seem
> to generate bad relocation entries with the 2.9.1 sun assembler
> ----
>
> I stand correct that binutils 2.9.1 is broken on Solaris/Sparc.
>
> Thank you for referring to the actual problem, rather than just saying
> that the code is ``so buggy.'' Is this problem fixed in the
I thought it was a common knowledge among gcc/binutils sparc users.
> development sources?
I believe so. I spent some time on the one related to it. If it still
doesn't work, I'd like to fix it.
>
> Does this have anything to do with the problem that Benjamin is
> seeing?
I have no idea. I won't spend my time on any bug Sparc/ELF reports
which use binutils 2.9.1.
H.J.