-shared-libgcc vs. -static -static-libgcc

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Feb 28, 2002, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 01:11:17AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> and libjava binaries no longer depend directly on libgcc_s, as intended.

> Err, no.  If a java binary throws or catches exceptions,
> and given the style of use of exceptions in java this is
> exceedingly likely, then the binary should link against
> libgcc_s so that it acquires the proper symbol versions.

Yeah.  I wish I had made that note when I first made the change....
Well, here's a revised patch that does not touch libstdc++-v3 nor
libjava (but that fixes the libstdc++-v3 -static problem because of
the change in gcc.c), and adds the note where it should have been put
in the first place.  I'm checking this in mainline and 3.1 branch.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cxx-shared-libgcc.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2946 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/attachments/20020228/d236fc19/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer