This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Compiling GCC with g++: a report


On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 04:20:27PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Um, there have been plenty of cases in the past where the top level set
> something correctly and the subdirectory makefiles overrode it with an
> incorrect setting.

Ah, but once we have a globally correct setting in the top level we can
brutally eliminate settings further down.  This does require toplevel
bootstrap.

> In private mail someone suggested $ORIGIN to me as a possible solution.
> I really don't mean to be giving the impression that these are
> intractable problems; I just don't want them considered non-problems.

$ORIGIN is nifty; but do you know how portable it is?  I've got no
clue.

> > > I'd want to see at least two major releases with no libstdc++ soname
> > > bump and no problems reported, before I had confidence we'd gotten
> > > it right.
> > 
> > You mean, like GCC 3.4 and GCC 4.0?
> 
> If GCC 4.1 comes out without anyone having reported 3.4/4.0
> incompatibilities, and continues to provide libstdc++.so.6, then yes,
> that would be like what I mean.  However, the active development on the
> libstdc++.so.7 branch means that we haven't even started the clock
> running on this criterion yet.

That would be three major releases unless you're counting differently
than I am.  My point was that we did preserve the soname between 3.4
and 4.0, and no one's reported trouble because of that yet - and I have
fairly high confidence that no one will.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]