Re: libgcc c++ support bits moved

["Zack Weinberg" <zackw at stanford dot edu>]

On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 03:10:39PM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 12:02:54AM +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > Targets that need to add multilibbed files to libgcc2 can
> > otherwise not compile those files with options other than for
> > the rest of libgcc2
> 
> You'll have to give me an example.  Why in the world would
> you multilib something, but then try to include files with
> different options than the multilib calls for?
> 
> As no one else needs to do this, you'll have to state a 
> good case for requiring that kind of hair.

In this context I'd like to point out that the .txt mechanism was
repeatedly the cause of serious parallel build bugs.  No one noticed
unless they took the time to track down H.J.'s obscure bug reports
(which usually fingered the wrong part of the Makefiles).  There has
got to be a better way to do whatever it is you want.

Richard - in addition to this patch, please strip out the lib2funcs
machinery from configure.in.  We don't want future front ends thinking
they're allowed to add stuff to libgcc2.

zw