init_priority ... would this work?

[Kean Johnston]

> And severely cramp program startup times, to support a feature
> only used by one embedded OS?  I'd just ignore it if I were you.
That's easy :)

So this init_priority is only there for one OS? I thought it was
some kind of generic solution to propper contructor init order.
I see the Linux/386 ld smooshes all the .ctor.PRIORITY things
together, in a nice sorted order. Is this *likely* to be something
we will see more of? I am thinking of bludgeoning the SCO link
editor to have a GNU ld semantics mode, where it combines all
.ctor.blah, .text.blah etc etc ... and all the .gnu.linkonce
stuff that gcc emits. If I cant do that for whatever reason,
is gcc not actually in error, emitting code that is GNU ld
specific on any non-GNU ld targets (re: gnu.linkonce.* sections)?

Kean

PS. I have started splitting out the crtstuff.c file. Its being
slowed down a bit by trying to get OSR5 to pass a reasonable
number of tests. I have it doing that now, except that a LOT
of C++ tests fail because of errors in libstdc++'s cmath. I
don't understand C++ and my question to this list on that
matter went unanswered except by someone commiserating with
me for having a similar problem.