readelf_need_wide
Phil Edwards
phil@jaj.com
Thu Sep 12 13:44:00 GMT 2002
On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 06:31:48PM -0500, Loren James Rittle wrote:
>
> However, we called system() not some form of wait() thus I'm skeptical
> that WEXITSTATUS may be used portability. Does POSIX document that
> system() must be implemented to preserve such status?
I think so, but...
> > The more I play with abi_check.cc, the more I become convinced that we'll
> > shortly be renaming it to abi_check.cc.in, and replacing these run-time
> > tests with autoconf'd macros.
>
> Seems that the entire shell call-out could be moved to the Makefile
> rule and then pass multiple files as input to the actual abi_check
> process. Any C++ program with a call to system() is ripe for change. ;-)
...I like this idea more, and that would neatly obviate the problem.
This would also solve the "we need an easy way to generate new baseline
files" request. I'll do this shortly.
Phil
--
I would therefore like to posit that computing's central challenge, viz. "How
not to make a mess of it," has /not/ been met.
- Edsger Dijkstra, 1930-2002
More information about the Libstdc++
mailing list