On 2012-03-20, at 10:41 PM, Vaugha Brewchuk wrote: > > On 2012-03-20, at 6:48 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > >> Vaugha Brewchuk <vaugha_brewchuk@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> I just had a good look at both static libraries that were generated during the build process, libstdc++ and libsupc++. I found that libstdc++ has in it all the objects from libsupc++ with the exception of eh_aux_runtime.o and eh_personality.o. This explains why I get linker warnings with missing symbols __gxx_personality_sj0 and __cxa_call_unexpected. Can you please confirm that these objects need to be statically linked into libstdc++? I can then figure out why they have been omitted. >> >> Yes, those objects should be in the static libstdc++.a archive. They >> should also be in the static libsupc++.a archive. I don't know why they >> would be missing for you. >> >> Ian > > This helps a lot, since now I know "why" and I just need to identify the "how". To help, I built gcc-3.2.3 with static libraries on a virtualized Ubuntu 4.10 and confirmed that the two objects are in both libraries. I will compare the build processes to determine why on NEXTSTEP eh_aux_runtime.o and eh_personality.o are in libsupc++ only and are missing in libstdc++. > > Thank you again! I was able to identify the root cause of the problem. The 'ar' implementation on NEXTSTEP truncates object file names to 15 characters: ar: filename eh_aux_runtime.o truncated to eh_aux_runtime. ar: filename eh_personality.o truncated to eh_personality. Consequently these objects extracted from libsupc++ have truncated file names and do not get picked-up by libtool when creating libstdc++. I also found an interesting post relating to this issue: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-libtool/2011-11/msg00002.html I will patch libtool supplied in gcc to fix this issue on NEXTSTEP. Thank you once again for everyone's help and patience.
