Re: A libgcc patch for gcc 3.0

["H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Sat, Mar 24, 2001 at 12:10:03AM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>    Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 08:26:35 -0800
>    From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
> 
>    On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 11:01:14AM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>    > "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
>    > 
>    > > I am not sure if gcc 3.0 will do the right thing for glibc. Here is
>    > > a patch. Basiscally, we treat libgcc_s.so as a system library. gcc
>    > > will use libgcc_s.so only if it is available from system or gcc is
>    > > configured with
>    > > 
>    > > --enable-shared=libgcc/--enable-shared=gcc
>    > > 
>    > > Any comments?
>    > 
>    > 1. If you're "not sure if gcc 3.0 will do the right thing for glibc"
>    >    it would be a good idea to:
>    > 
>    >    1. Check if it really doesn't.
>    > 
>    >    2. Identify what's going wrong.  And try to explain it to the rest
>    >       of us.
>    > 
>    >    3. Try to come up with a fix.
>    > 
>    >    Jumping straight to step 3 really isn't a good idea.
> 
>    I have done 1 and 2.
> 
> And would you care to share your knowledge with the rest of us?
> 

Please check the gcc/glibc mailing list archives. There are many
threads on this topic. Here are a few

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-02/msg00485.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-02/msg00896.html

I don't want to spend any more time discussing why it is bad for glibc.


H.J.