Created attachment 639392 [details] [diff] [review] Build with gcc 4.2.x Community SSU trying to build fennec for N900 because it is only modern available option for N900. I tried to build recent tip and got this error: /home/scratchbox/compilers/cs2007q3-glibc2.5-arm7/bin/arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: libxul.so: hidden symbol `int SortedArrayOf<RangeRecord>::search<unsigned int>(unsigned int const&) const' isn't defined /home/scratchbox/compilers/cs2007q3-glibc2.5-arm7/bin/arm-none-linux-gnueabi-ld: final link failed: Nonrepresentable section on output collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make: *** [libxul.so] Error 1 I've noticed that this stuff got removed from trunk with some update http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/392319d8c1fa#l55.411 and that was making it compile with that compiler.
Comment on attachment 639392 [details] [diff] [review] Build with gcc 4.2.x Review of attachment 639392 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ::: gfx/harfbuzz/src/hb-open-type-private.hh @@ +685,5 @@ > +#if __GNUC__ && (__GNUC__ < 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ < 4)) > +// work around GCC 4.3 bug where the search() function gets improperly > +// optimized away from some instantiations of this template > +#pragma GCC visibility push(default) > +#endif Would it make sense to do "#pragma GCC visibility pop" later, to minimize the effect of this?
Comment on attachment 639392 [details] [diff] [review] Build with gcc 4.2.x Behdad, is this something you'd be willing to take upstream, if it fixes the compilation problem with some older gcc versions?
Jonathan, I'm adding -fvisibility-inlines-hidden to the build. Can you check whether that would fix the issue? If not, yes, I'm fine with it, if done with the matching pop (which is available in the change pointed to in the original report.)
romaxa, is this still a problem now that bug 780409 has landed, or have the changes there resolved it?
Jonathan, did you also add the -fvisibility-inlines-hidden flag to the build?
I'll try to recompile and will check it soon
Yep, with bug 780409 landed problem not reproducible anymore. Thanks
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 6 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.