From owner-freebsd-current Sun Mar 9 02:29:38 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA13593 for current-outgoing; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 02:29:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id CAA13588 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 02:29:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.5/8.6.9) with ESMTP id CAA24356 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 02:29:46 -0800 (PST) To: current@freebsd.org Subject: 2 questions about C++ support in 2.2 Date: Sun, 09 Mar 1997 02:29:46 -0800 Message-ID: <24352.857903386@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I've noticed lately in trying to compile some of the more complex C++ applications I've been playing with (one being ports/devel/tvision to cite a specific example) that the assembler now spits out quite a bit of stuff along these lines: /var/tmp/cc024167.s:10678: Warning: GOT relocation burb: `_Am_Standard_Widget_Abort_Method_proc__FG9Am_Object' should be global /var/tmp/cc024167.s:10678: Warning: GOT relocation burb: `_Am_Standard_Widget_Stop_Method_proc__FG9Am_ObjectG8Am_Value' should be global /var/tmp/cc024167.s:10678: Warning: GOT relocation burb: `_Am_Standard_Widget_Start_Method_proc__FG9Am_ObjectG8Am_Value' should be global /var/tmp/cc024167.s:10678: Warning: GOT relocation burb: `_border_rectangle_draw_proc__FG9Am_ObjectP13Am_Drawonableii' should be global /var/tmp/cc024167.s:10678: Warning: GOT relocation burb: `_do_accelerator_action_proc__FG9Am_Object' should be global And so on (these messages are from a compilation of the Amulet 2.0 library, in case anyone actually cares). So now the two questions: 1. What the hell is a "relocation burb" and how can one avoid them? :-) 2. Shouldn't these messages demange the symbol first, so you don't have to hassle with c++filt? I thought we were here once before (though probably in connection with the loader) and everyone agreed that built-in symbol demanging was good, very user friendly and we should all do it. Whatever happened to that idea? :-) If it's just something which has fallen on the floor, it annoys me enough that I'd be willing to pick it up myself. Yours for a nicer (relatively speaking) C++ environment... Jordan P.S. I don't expect for us to have anything improved for 2.2-RELEASE, but maybe we could at least get it fixed up in time for 2.2.1? :)