Re: GCC 3.0 Release Criteria

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

>>>>> "Richard" == Richard Henderson <rth@cygnus.com> writes:

    Richard> On Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 04:31:08PM -0700, Mark Mitchell
    Richard> wrote:
    >> So, in all cases, the additional burden is minor: the burden of
    >> shipping a shared libgcc is never introduced where the
    >> application was not already shipping a shared library in the
    >> first place.

    Richard> I believe what David is concerned about is not a company
    Richard> distributing a product, but Billy Joe giving Bobby Rae a
    Richard> new build of dustydeck.exe to try out on last week's
    Richard> collected crystal growth data.  I.e. two random users
    Richard> collaborating on different machines.

If so, I think that's not a very big deal, frankly.  If Bobby Rae can
handle installing dustydeck, I think he can handle installing
libgcc.so as well.  And, as both you and I pointed out, in many
situations linking with libgcc.so won't be ncessary.  (Only if
dustydeck is linked against other shared libraries built with gcc.)

    Richard> I've also just replied to David's message with a scheme
    Richard> that might help us automatically select the proper
    Richard> behaviour in such cases.

Thanks.

That kind of thing might well be a good idea -- but only after we get
the basic bits implemented. :-)

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com