https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27495
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sam at gentoo dot org
--
You are
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27495
--- Comment #11 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10)
> They fail at random on both i686 and x86-64.
Ignore this.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27495
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
They fail at random on both i686 and x86-64.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27495
--- Comment #9 from Fangrui Song ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #8)
> (In reply to Alan Modra from comment #7)
> >
> > It is true that --start-stop-gc may break linking with current static glibc,
> > a fact that limits --start-stop-gc
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27495
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #7)
>
> It is true that --start-stop-gc may break linking with current static glibc,
> a fact that limits --start-stop-gc usefulness.
>
> BTW, this testcase also shows an
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27495
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-z start_stop_gc isn't |-z start_stop_gc isn't
