The remaining dubious symbols in libgcc-std.ver

[Richard Henderson]

On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 07:01:04PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> (insert rant about code duplication in t-fragments here)

Yes, well, they're not exact duplicates, and there didn't seem to
be any clear thing you could point to in the way of abstraction
other than the whole damned linking process.

> I'm not sure what -Wl,-set_version,gcc.0 means as an alpha/osf4 link
> option or whether it's appropriate to bump the 0 to 1.

It does mean what you thought.

>  SHLIB_EXT = .so
> +SHLIB_NAME = @shlib_base_name@.so
> +SHLIB_SONAME = @shlib_base_name@.so.1
> +SHLIB_MAP = @shlib_map_file@
> +SHLIB_OBJS = @shlib_objs@

You've tested this?  I'm somewhat nervous because SHLIB_LINK gets
passed around as a make variable and I'm not sure all the substitution
will be done at the proper times.



r~