Issue with Latest GDB on AIX with GCC-6.12

Nitish Kumar Mishra
Mon Feb 20 11:37:00 GMT 2017

Hi All !
The proposed patch is tested on AIX-7.2 and Ubuntu-16.04 and it seems
to be working fine.


On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Nitish Kumar Mishra
<> wrote:
> Hi All !
> Please find the patch attachment with this mail.
> Any comments are more than welcome.
> Thanks,
> Nitish
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Nitish Kumar Mishra
> <> wrote:
>> Hi All !
>> I have created a bug for this issue. The bug id is: 21187.
>> I have created a patch for configure file in which new configure
>> option --enable-staticlib and --disable-staticlib is implemented.
>> By default the linking of GDB with libstdc++ and libgcc will be static.
>> Attching the patch with the mail.
>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Nitish Kumar Mishra
>> <> wrote:
>>> Hi David !
>>>>Who built GCC 6.1 for you?  Is this an IBM build or Bull Freeware?
>>> IBM does not have GCC-6 build yet, and generally Bull's rpm breaks our
>>> environment. I took it from
>>> But now I have tested it with Bull's RPM, static linking still not
>>> working but removing --static-libstdc++ and --static-libgcc
>>> is working for me as well.
>>> Now, I will run the testsuite and will paste the result once it's finished.
>>> I disabled the static options manually. I don't see any configure
>>> option for disabling the static linking. I tried with one configure
>>> option --disable-libstdcxx, but I dont think it will lead to dynamic
>>> linking. Anyways, for me, using this option --disable-libstdcxx
>>> was giving compilation error, saying, "ld soes not support target".
>>> Thanks,
>>> Nitish
>>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 8:49 PM, Eli Zaretskii <> wrote:
>>>>> From: David Edelsohn <>
>>>>> Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 10:02:35 -0500
>>>>> Cc: Nitish Kumar Mishra <>, "" <>,      Yao Qi <>
>>>>> >> Can we disable -static-libgcc and -static-libstdc++ for AIX?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Works for me.  Those are added by the top level configure.  They were
>>>>> > originally added for gcc, we just inherited it.  Ideally adding
>>>>> > those would be controllable with a configure option, IMO.
>>>>> We shouldn't disable static-libgcc and static-libstdc++ for GCC.  And
>>>>> static would be better.  But linking GDB dynamically could be helpful
>>>>> as an interim work-around.
>>>> Please let's not do that on MS-Windows at least.  Dynamically linking
>>>> against these two libraries has the following 2 adverse effects:
>>>>   . it requires any site that distributes precompiled Windows binaries
>>>>     of GDB to also distribute the full humongous tarball of GCC
>>>>     sources (because libgcc runtime exception doesn't cover dynamic
>>>>     linking against shared libraries); and
>>>>   . it opens the gates of the "DLL hell", since there's any number of
>>>>     libgcc and libstdc++ DLLs from different versions of GCC floating
>>>>     around on any given Windows system with GNU software, and there's
>>>>     no practical way to ensure binary compatibility between the one
>>>>     found first on PATH and a particular version of GDB one wants to
>>>>     run

More information about the Gdb mailing list