Re: LIBGCC_SPEC

[Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>]

On Tuesday, February 17, 2004, at 04:18 PM, Jim Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 15:46, Matt Austern wrote:
> > In the case of Darwin, the biggest problem is that -static and
> > -static-libgcc need to do completely different things.
>
> You still haven't explained what the problem is.  You said the output
> needs to be different, but you did not say what the difference is, or
> why it needs to be different.  If this has been explained in another
> thread, then just pointing to the other thread is fine.  Otherwise, 
> this
> is still too abstract.
>
> Alternatively, offer a patch, and then we can see what changes you are
> suggesting, and then we might be able to offer useful comments.

Darwin has an existing -static option, that generates code that doesn't 
use dylib stuff.  This option is a multilib style option, you either 
are all dylib (-dynamic), or all -static.  The system doesn't have a 
-static version of the standard C library, nor and C++ runtime 
libraries.

The bug that causes the .a version of the EH runtime to not work with 
dylibs doesn't exist, so we don't need the shared version of libgcc to 
solve that problem.  We would like it to solve the space problem 
however.

We would like to support options to allow the user to select the .a 
version of libgcc, or the .dylib version of it.  I think we were 
thinking that -shared-libgcc or -static-libgcc would do this.

-static select _another_ libgcc.a file, the one with the funky codegen.

I think that provides most of the important background bits.