[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: relocation R_X86_64_PC32



On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 07:06 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Caolan McNamara wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 11:18 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> >> Rex Dieter wrote:
> >> 
> >> I've confirmed there is no asm, and the file in question *was* built
> >> with -fPIC:
> >> 
> >> g++ -c -m64 -pipe -I/usr/include/mysql -fno-exceptions -O2 -g -pipe -Wall
> >> \ -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4
> >> -m64 \ -mtune=generic -fvisibility=hidden -fvisibility-inlines-hidden
> >> -Wall -W \
> >> -D_REENTRANT -fPIC  -DQT_SHARED -DQT_BUILD_CORE_LIB -DQT_NO_CAST_TO_ASCII
> >> \ -DQT3_SUPPORT -DQT_MOC_COMPAT -DQT_NO_DEBUG -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE \
> >> -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -I../../mkspecs/linux-g++-64 -I. -I../../include \
> >> -I../../include/QtCore -Iglobal -I.moc/release-shared -I. \
> >> -o .obj/release-shared/qthread_unix.o thread/qthread_unix.cpp
> 
> > Try disabling visibility support, it doesn't currently work in the devel
> > gcc the way qt probably expects it to, i.e. add
> >  "-no-reduce-exports" 
> > to your qt4.spec's configure line
> 
> Thanks.   Is there a bugzilla on this and/or when can we expect -fvisibility
> to be fixed?

well... there is no reason to add -fvisibility with current gcc's... the
default behavior is the optimized right one already


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]