Re: Shared library annoyance with gcc-3_0-branch

[Linus Torvalds <torvalds at transmeta dot com>]

On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Bo Thorsen wrote:
> 
> I've seen this statement a couple of times in this thread now, and --
> correct me if I'm wrong here -- it seems to be saying that the problem
> isn't as bad, if it is only a C++ issue.

Ehh..

I realize that lots of people like C++. I personally don't, but it's
really not about likes and dislikes.

C++ may be widely used in many areas, and yes, gcc problems with C++ are
going to be embarrassing and nasty. Yes.

But you should realize that gcc is still used for things like system
binaries, and they use C. Not C++:

Things like "mount". Things like "ifconfig". 

Things that might (and _do_) want to use libgcc, but that do NOT want to
have a shared library off in the weeds somewhere.

And this is where C and C++ are _different_. It's ok to hide a C++ shared
library somewhere strange - people will not necessarily like it, but at
least they can work with it, and it's obviously one of the things on the
table (ie having libgcc off on /usr/local etc).

But it's NOT ok to have the basic libgcc functionality (integer divisions
etc) potentially unaccessible. 

		Linus