Re: g++-mike-eh8-C test failure

[Jason Merrill <jason at cygnus dot com>]

>>>>> John David Anglin <dave@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> writes:

 >>  > Building a shared libgcc is a good idea on its own.  However, it
 >>  > might not resolve this problem.  There still might be duplication of
 >>  > procedures and problems with libraries that don't have a shared
 >>  > implementation.
 >> 
 >> Why would there be duplication?

 > This is what the HP-UX Linker and Libraries Online User Guide says about
 > the subject:

 > Summary of Mixing Shared and Archive Libraries

 > Applications that depend on shared libraries should not use archive
 > libraries to satisfy symbol imports in a shared library. 

Yes, absolutely.  That's why we're talking about libgcc.sl.  Are you
worried about symbols from libm?

 > This suggests that only a shared version of libc should be used in
 > applications using shared libraries. If an archive version of a
 > dependent library must be used, all of its definitions should be
 > explicitly exported with the -E or +e options to the linker to avoid
 > multiple definitions.

Which suggests that libstdc++.sl should be built with -E.

Jason