Shared library annoyance with gcc-3_0-branch

[Mark Mitchell]

>>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

    Daniel> Will this behave correctly if glibc explicitly does not
    Daniel> link to libgcc_s?  That seems like it would defeat the
    Daniel> purpose of of having a shared libgcc fairly thoroughly.
    Daniel> My goal is to get C programs, at least those which require
    Daniel> no shared libraries beyong the standard C library, to run
    Daniel> without shared libgcc being available; I consider this a
    Daniel> robustness issue.  It may not be feasible, though.

I'm not sure about glibc.  I do know that the GCC driver will not
explicitly link in libgcc_s for a static link of a C program.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com