This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Next attempt on the gcc3 vs glibc2.2.4 patch
On Tue, Aug 07, 2001 at 11:09:58AM -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
>
> > I thought it was always true regardless of dlopening libgcc_s.so.1 or
> > not.
>
> I don't understand. I was talking about using exactly one
> implementation, the one from libgcc_s.
In theory, the one in libc.so should be exchangeable with the one in
libgcc_s.so.1 so that it doesn't matter where it comes from.
>
> > 1. Jakub's patch doesn't do that.
>
> I know.
>
> > 2. This scheme will only work with symbol versioning. Are you proposing
> > it as the solution to gcc? Personally, I am all for it. But what about
> > the other gcc targets which don't have symbol versioning?
>
> What has this to do with glibc? We are only talking about existing
> port of glibc. They are all ELF and use symbol versioning. The
> libgcc_s on these targets also use symbol versioning. No problem.
You are assuming they will use GCC_3.1 when they have a change that
which only the current _Unwind_Find_FDE can understand. Are you 100%
sure they will do that? Like I said, I hope they will do that. But
what about other gcc targets? Do you know what final scheme they will
use?
H.J.