This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: A completely different approach to EH runtime


On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 02:39:10PM -0800, Per Bothner wrote:
> "H . J . Lu" <hjl@valinux.com> writes:
> 
> > Yes. But who is responsible putting libgcc_s.so in /lib?
> 
> The distribution maker (i.e. RedHat).
> 
> > Say RedHat
> > 8.0 has gcc 3.0.1 with libgcc_s.so in /lib. Now a RedHat 8.0 user
> > wants to try gcc of the day from CVS or gcc 3.0.2. Will the new
> > libgcc_s.so be configured/built and where will it be installed?
> 
> It should probably be installed in /usr/local/lib.  It should
> definitely *not* be installed in /lib unless the needed configure
> flags are given.  More generally, it should not (without appropriate
> configure flags) be installed in any place that the dynamically
> linker by default searches before /lib.
> 

Now you have 2 libgcc_s.so. Which one should ld.so use? Taking into
account DSO and dlopen, I doubt 2 libgcc_s.so is a good idea. BTW,
as I said before, it is the same thing to have 2 libc.so.6 under
Linux. Unless both are provided by the distribution maker, it won't
work very well since ld.so won't know which one is the right one.


-- 
H.J. Lu (hjl@valinux.com)


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]