This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:12:24 -0700 From: Richard Henderson <rth@cygnus.com> On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 10:40:28AM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote: > > The fact that the Linux libc contains and reexports the frame info > > registration functions make things a little more complicated, and > > I believe it is the cause of the problem. Otherwise, it will be > libstdc++.so who contains and reexports the frame info registration > functions, which is the part of gcc and handled by my "library > interface" scheme. It is an entirely different issuse. Not at all. It's exactly the same issue, with just the names changed. Indeed. Moreover, HJ's scheme doesn't even solve the problem of rexporting the frame info registration info. It may seem like it does, but that's only because the C++ ABI changed more frequently than the frame info registration. The only thing HJ's scheme *does* "solve" is dealing with the libio changes made between glibc 2.0 and glibc 2.1, that quite deliberately ignored the consequences for C++ (since the C++ ABI was in flux anyway at that time). It's incredibly ugly, and I hope it can be phased out in with Ggcc 3.0 r~
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |