> > I don't understand why this would happen, because I don't understand why > gcc/lto would link libc.a in first. It shouldn't. If this is indeed > the problem, then it presumably is not happening on other targets > because on most targets there is no LTO information for libc.a. I would > recommend opening a bug report for this with enough input files (e.g., > libc.a) to recreate the problem. > > Ian > Thanks Ian, I am sure that our libc.a has no lto information either,Does it have sth to do with this? Since I was thinking that lto could be done between objects/libraries which have and don't have lto information. Am I right? - Best Regards.
