From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jul 17 00:59:15 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id AAA10919 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 17 Jul 1995 00:59:15 -0700 Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [192.216.222.3]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id AAA10910 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 1995 00:59:14 -0700 Received: from irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.1.11]) by who.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.11) with SMTP id AAA12564 for ; Mon, 17 Jul 1995 00:58:50 -0700 Received: from sax.sax.de by irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de with SMTP (5.67b+/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA27136; Mon, 17 Jul 1995 09:53:27 +0200 Received: by sax.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id JAA07962; Mon, 17 Jul 1995 09:53:26 +0200 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.6.11/8.6.9) id IAA04835; Mon, 17 Jul 1995 08:59:13 +0200 From: J Wunsch Message-Id: <199507170659.IAA04835@uriah.heep.sax.de> Subject: Re: And another g++ question To: dufault@hda.com (Peter Dufault) Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 08:59:13 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org (FreeBSD hackers) In-Reply-To: <199507162215.SAA04276@hda.com> from "Peter Dufault" at Jul 16, 95 06:15:04 pm Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Length: 1071 Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk As Peter Dufault wrote: > > > strstream.cc:53: Undefined symbol `__vt$builtinbuf' referenced from text segment > > strstream.cc:59: Undefined symbol `__vt$builtinbuf' referenced from text segment > > strstream.cc:70: Undefined symbol `__vt$builtinbuf' referenced from text segment > > The curious thing is that there is a "__vt$10builtinbuf" defined > in libg++.a but nothing without a 10. Also the undefined is coming > from libg++ .o's, yet the undefineds don't show up in libg++.a > namelist, so it must be some sort of g++ constructed sort of thing. > > Does anyone recognize this problem? Are you sure your C++ compiler and library and header files match? I've typically seen this when installing a new version of g++ on our Data General machines, but it's been a while ago. The __vt$'s are the virtual method tables. There are now two ways (if i recall it right), and one of them is to work without those tables. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)