--- Comment #7 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-13 23:56 ---
Marking as WONTFIX as per comment#1 above.
--
ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from laurent at guerby dot net 2009-05-13 15:09 ---
No objection from me.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38703
--- Comment #5 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-13 14:51 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> That's what dg-require-profiling does.
>
> IMHO this is a deficiency in your glibc. It's very hard to distinguish between
> "something is subtly busted" and "my glibc sucks", so I'm not sur
--- Comment #4 from laurent at guerby dot net 2009-01-10 13:10 ---
List of tests with undefined reference to `__gnu_mcount_nc'
FAIL: gcc.dg/20021014-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/nest.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/nested-func-4.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-01-02 17:35 ---
Subject: Re: testsuite __gnu_mcount_nc link error when
profiling on arm
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009, laurent at guerby dot net wrote:
> I could not find a GLIBC 2.8 release in http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/
> nor in ftp://
--- Comment #2 from laurent at guerby dot net 2009-01-02 17:30 ---
The test already has:
/home/guerby/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/20021014-1.c
/* { dg-require-profiling "-p" } */
If configure tests the system compiler for profiling "support" it will of
course be fooled by a GCC changing
--- Comment #1 from pbrook at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-02 17:01 ---
That's what dg-require-profiling does.
IMHO this is a deficiency in your glibc. It's very hard to distinguish between
"something is subtly busted" and "my glibc sucks", so I'm not sure fixing this
is appropriate for
