X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <49F76276.7010101@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 06:09:26 +1000 From: David Billinghurst User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Should gcc -p work? References: <49F707F4 DOT 6050004 AT gmail DOT com> <49F70CD6 DOT 6030908 AT sbcglobal DOT net> In-Reply-To: <49F70CD6.6030908@sbcglobal.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Greg Chicares wrote: > On 2009-04-28 13:43Z, David Billinghurst wrote: >> I am looking into some gcc-4.{4,5}testsuite failures on cygwin. Test >> gcc.dg/20021014-1.c, with CFLAGS="-O2 -p", fails due to undefined >> references to _mcount and __monstartup. I get the same result with >> gcc-3.4.4 and gcc-4.3.2. If this is expected then I will submit a gcc >> testsuite patch to skip this test. > > Does it work with '-pg' but fail with '-p'? Yes > Perhaps this is related: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-02/msg01131.html Yes. I was going to do something similar. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/