970929 test results: libstdc++ test failures! (sparc-solaris251)

[H.J. Lu]

> I want to get out of the mode where I have to continually replace my Linux
> C libraries to use a new compiler.  I don't have to do that on any other

That is not entirely true. I used to have a patch to support it.

> platform.  What's worse, the new libraries often break existing
> applications, ones I may not have the source for (e.g. Netscape), and

It shouldn't break Netscape unless it is a bug in Netscape itself.
The new libc may expose the bug. As far as I know, the new Netscape
works ok.

> pointing the finger at the other app developer does no good.  Why should
> this be acceptable for Linux?  It basically says that only wizards may
> use new compilers, or else all Linux users must wait for a wizard, such
> as HJ Lu, to build binaries for everyone.  This makes Linux feel, um,
> "proprietary".  As Mike Tiemann once said, free software is supposed to
> be no-hassle software.

The problem is not with gcc. It is libio that causes the problem.
The solution has been there for a long time. But no one cared
enough to make the official libg++ to work with linux out of box.
Now Ulrich is working on libg++. Things will be different. 

> 
> It would be better if the new compiler can adapt to the existing
> libraries, possibly by adding more autoconf tests to find problem areas.
> 
> When egcs is released, it should be possible for Linux users who have the
> then-current Red Hat or Debian distribution to build a working egcs
> without upgrading their C library.
> 

The new C libraries usually fix some bugs. It makes senses to
upgrade libc first.


-- 
H.J. Lu (hjl@gnu.ai.mit.edu)