This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [HELP] GCC 4.1 branch Ada status on powerpc-darwin?
- From: Arnaud Charlet <charlet at adacore dot com>
- To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at adacore dot com>
- Cc: Geoffrey Keating <geoffk at apple dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Peter O'Gorman <peter at pogma dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>, Chris Douty <Chris_Douty at ampex dot com>, Laurent GUERBY <laurent at guerby dot net>, Vincent Celier <celier at adacore dot com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 10:29:00 +0100
- Subject: Re: [HELP] GCC 4.1 branch Ada status on powerpc-darwin?
- References: <1137484110.20435.1003.camel@pc.site> <200601232251.26922.ebotcazou@adacore.com> <956B133C-F432-4D5A-A21E-865FE6061A15@apple.com> <200601232315.57601.ebotcazou@adacore.com>
> I'm not sure we'd be willing to trade minimal dependencies for "future binary
> compatibility", but I see your point. I'll let Arnaud decide.
Well if you ask me, I'd rather not put anything special for Darwin.
Failing that, I'd rather see a very minimal change.
Having systematically a dependency on libgcc_s in the world I live in
is simply a pain, no matter how you put it, so that's really my least
preferred option.
Also as others said, caring about forward compatibility on Darwin when
we see that Darwin is handled in such a weird way and keep changing things
seems a very dubious argument at best.
So if we want to switch to constructive mode, I do not really see a
minimal patch to solve this unless the gcc driver can be changed.
Otherwise, we could modify systematically the binder/linker to always
call gcc with either -static-libgcc or -shared-libgcc when linking, depending
on whether shared libs are used. Or we could make this capability optional
and enabled with a flag in link.c named e.g. "__gnat_force_libgcc_switch"
In any case, we're talking about non trivial amount of work.
Maybe Vincent (cc:ed) would have some other suggestions on the possible
approaches ? (see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-01/msg00616.html for
earlier discussions on this subject).
Arno