Re: A completely different approach to EH runtime

[Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>]

Don Bashford <bashford@scripps.edu> writes:

> For Linux, we are faced with the peculiarity that Red Hat 7.0 was
> shipped with the so-called "gcc-2.96", but serious user/developers
> need a more stable compiler, so we install gcc-2.95.2 under
> exec-prefix=/tsri/gnu/i86Linux2 and encourage users to put
> /tsri/gnu/i86Linux2/bin in their PATH ahead of /usr/bin.  At the same
> time, many of the Linux boxes on campus are running Red Hat 6.x.  So
> we have, simultaneously, the cases of using a gcc which may be older
> or newer than the "native" gcc.  So as to JB's solution of nuking the
> dynamic libgcc under /tsri/gnu in our case, for those running on
> machine whose "native" gcc is older it should be nuked, but for those
> running on a machine with a newer native gcc the dynamic libgcc under
> /tsri/gnu should NOT be nuked.  But of course, it cannot be both nuked
> and not nuked.

I didn't think that you could use the same compiler on both Red Hat
6.x and Red Hat 7, because the libio was different.  Certainly here
at Red Hat's engineering section we have different compilers for
x86-linux-gnu, x86-linux-gnulibc2.1 and x86-linux-gnulibc2.2.

Between libio, fixincludes, libgcc, thread libraries, and ptrace, I
think that similar things are true for Linux, Solaris, and AIX: if you
upgrade the OS, you need to rebuild the tools.

-- 
- Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>