Joseph Garvin wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Andrew Haley<aph@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> i386 has lock incl, surely, so __sync_add_and_fetch isn't a problem. >> It's stuff like __sync_val_compare_and_swap you don't have. > > I thought the lock instruction didn't exist until the pentium pro? I have an actual paper 1989 vintage i386 manual, and lock is defined. > Hmm, I'm a bit confused. Our internal build environment will fail > building software that uses __sync_add_and_fetch with a link error on > it being undefined if I don't pass it CXXFLAGS="-march=i686". The > environment prints its invocations of gcc to standard out so I can see > that it isn't passing any march flags itself -- infact I can see that > it's just passing normal -I and -L's. Do you have any idea what it > could be doing differently that would cause it to give the error then > but not when I invoke gcc by hand? Sorry, no idea. You'll just have to get in there and debug it. :-) Andrew.
