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 clue for the libstdc++ problem.


On Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 04:40:55PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Apr  1, 2001, "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> wrote:
> 
> > 	* ltcf-cxx.sh: Make sure we never use g++ for the shared
> > 	libstdc++-v3.
> 
> This is outrageously misleading.  BTW, you've duplicated Zack's
> investigative work, and the patch for the top-level Makefile.in I
> wrote on Friday to address his findings hasn't worked, it seems, but
> it's the Makefile.in that has to be fixed.  Maybe with some
> cooperation from the top-level configure.in, for example, setting a
> different CXX_FOR_TARGET for use for libstdc++-v3.  But this still
> wouldn't fix problem of taking the libstdc++-v3 flags created only
> after libstdc++-v3 is configured.  I'm still aiming at a
> single-CXX_FOR_TARGET solution.  The tricky thing is how to defer the
> evaluation of CXX_FOR_TARGET.
> 

Please keep in mind that building the shared libstdc++ is a special
case, just like building libc.so. You cannot use the normal C++ rules,
just like we don't use the normal C rule for building libc.so. I think
the best way to fix it may be to have something like ltcf-stdcxx.sh,
which is only used for building libstdc++.so. Anything else probably
will be just another kludge which may introduce other problems.


H.J.


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