This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: libgcc_s, Linux, and PT_GNU_EH_FRAME, and binutils
On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 11:33:25AM -0400, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 11:22:27AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > > What's so hard on upgrading glibc?
> >
> > I don't think requiring users who want a feature of the newer compiler
> > to upgrade their core system library is really justified. And on older
> > OS versions, or on a self-built system, it's a pretty nervous process.
>
> Fine, but it should be made clear to them that they might have trouble
> running g++ 3.2 compiled applications built by others.
> Something like glibc configury which, unless --disable-sanity-checks
> is given to configure, exists with error if the result would not be binary
> compatible with others (such as trying to build without linuxthreads
> on linux).
This idea I like a great deal.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
- References:
- Re: libgcc_s, Linux, and PT_GNU_EH_FRAME, and binutils
- Re: libgcc_s, Linux, and PT_GNU_EH_FRAME, and binutils
- Re: libgcc_s, Linux, and PT_GNU_EH_FRAME, and binutils
- Re: libgcc_s, Linux, and PT_GNU_EH_FRAME, and binutils
- Re: libgcc_s, Linux, and PT_GNU_EH_FRAME, and binutils
- Re: libgcc_s, Linux, and PT_GNU_EH_FRAME, and binutils