This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: gcc 3.x test matrix
- To: Mark Kettenis <kettenis at science dot uva dot nl>
- Subject: Re: gcc 3.x test matrix
- From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 23:00:14 -0700
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot cygnus dot com>
- References: <20010831092101.A31754@lucon.org> <s3iheunmfni.fsf@soliton.wins.uva.nl>
On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 11:20:01AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
>
> > Here is something I come up with.
>
> I don't think it's our job to check whether the GCC folks are
> correctly maintaining maintaining binary compatibility. It should be
> safe to restrict ourselves to GCC 2.95.4 (with the "standard" patches)
> and GCC 3.0.1.
>
I disagreee. The whole idea of dlopening libgcc.so.1 is for future
changes in gcc. If we have no ideas about what the impacts of those
changes are, how do we know this scheme will work? There are many
ways for gcc to provide the binary compatibility. I don't think it
will work right if gcc and glibc don't work together from the very
beginning.
H.J.