Re: Shared library annoyance with gcc-3_0-branch

[Bernd Schmidt <bernds at cambridge dot redhat dot com>]

On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Richard Henderson wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 12:45:49AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > Could we somehow get away with not linking shared libraries to the
> > shared libgcc unless they used C++, and requiring dynamic libgcc in
> > applications which wished to have correct exception handling and use
> > C++ shared libraries?
>
> Yes, we could.  The problem is identifying these situations automatically.
> It wouldn't be too bad if we could just presume ELF, but coming up with a
> solution that works everywhere has eluded me.
>
> Do recall that you can *always* use --static-libgcc to override the default.

I know next to nothing about the issues (and I'll shut up immediately), but
if the current defaults do cause an inconvenience to users in the more common
case (building shared libraries with C rather than with C++), we may want to
think about reversing the default and providing a --shared-libgcc switch to
override it.


Bernd