A completely different approach to EH runtime

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Feb 22, 2001, Joern Rennecke <amylaar@redhat.com> wrote:

> This would indicate that either the old library was broken - than you
> should replace it - or that the new library has additional functionality -
> than its minor version should be incremented; then the dynamic linker
> will pick the newer library for programs that have been linked with the
> new gcc.

Given that the dynamic linker has no notion of dates or minor version
numbers, it would only have a clear reason to choose the ``newer''
library if its SONAME were different, i.e., if it had a different
major version number.  But we shouldn't change the major version
number every time we make a change in libgcc, otherwise the number of
versions of libgcc needed to run a collection of programs will
eventually be of the same order of magnitude as the number of
programs.

-- 
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    *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me