This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: PATCH: Share the dwarf2 unwind code between glibc and gcc 3.0
- To: Jason Merrill <jason_merrill at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: PATCH: Share the dwarf2 unwind code between glibc and gcc 3.0
- From: Mark Kettenis <kettenis at science dot uva dot nl>
- Date: 09 Jul 2001 15:10:45 +0200
- Cc: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot cygnus dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <20010708194519.A4713@lucon.org> <m366d2fpo7.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com>
Jason Merrill <jason_merrill@redhat.com> writes:
> I thought this was why we created libgcc_s.so--so that we wouldn't have to
> worry about keeping the copy of libgcc in glibc up to date. Why can't
> glibc just link against the shared libgcc?
__frame_state_for is part of the libc.so ABI, and is no longer part of
libgcc_s.so (and libgcc.a). We either have to roll our own version
for glibc, or it has to be reimplemented in GCC and added back to
libgcc.
Apart from that, plain linking libc.so against libgcc_s.so would
efectively make the libgcc_s.so ABI part of the libc.so ABI. That
might be undesirable. Then it might not... I don't have a really
strong opinion about that.