Re: Please review 3.4 patches

[Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>]

On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 10:01:47PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-10/msg00795.html
> 
> This last one, at least, is clearly wrong.
> 
> You're now defaulting to --enable-shared, even on systems that may not 
> support shared libraries at all.
> 
> What's wrong with Joe's suggested solution: set LD_LIBRARY_PATH when 
> running programs from the stage1/ or stage2/ directories?
> 
> Also, do we have a list of the patches that went in post GCC 3.4.2 that 
> are causing problems?  I want to know what we will have to take out if 
> we have to take things out.

I think the libunwind patch is the most problematic one and should not made
it into the stable branch, just HEAD (and even there I don't like it very
much).
It e.g. forces using davidm's libunwind always, as GCC built libunwind.so.7
can't reasonably coexist with davidm's libunwind.so.7 (which some programs
like gdb want to use) and adds one extra shared library to all programs that
need EH (the whole C++ world, plus C using cancellation).
I think better alternative would be to link in only libgcc_s.so.0
when configured without system unwind and when configured with system
libunwind, have wrappers exported from libgcc_s.so.0 that would immediately
jump to the libunwind.so functions.  That way binary compatibility between
--without-system-libunwind and --with-system-libunwind GCC would be ensured
as well.

	Jakub