Re: libgcc_s, Linux, and PT_GNU_EH_FRAME, and binutils

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

--On Monday, August 05, 2002 05:57:11 AM -0400 Richard Henderson 
<rth@twiddle.net> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 10:11:59AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > That's why I propose that in order to build g++ 3.2 interoperable with
> > everyone else glibc 2.2.5+, binutils 2.12.1+ and --enable-shared
> > --enable-threads=posix --enable-__cxa_atexit is required.
> > We could even cook up a testsuite which wether g++/libgcc_s/libstdc++
> > follow those requiremenets.
> I think it would be reasonable to actively fail the configure
> on Linux if these requirements are not met.  Otherwise it's
> sure to be the case that someone won't read this even if we
> were to document it properly.
>
> Mark, what do you think?
I agree.  I don't think we need to do this for GCC 3.2, but I do think
it would be good to do this at some point.

This is an instance of the "choices are bad" idea; if we remove the
option to screw up configuring stuff that is a good thing.

We could, instead of failing, just hardwire the switches on and warn.

--
Mark Mitchell                mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC            http://www.codesourcery.com