This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: -fno-inline-functions vs glibc's initfini
- From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- To: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 00:36:40 -0200
- Subject: Re: -fno-inline-functions vs glibc's initfini
- References: <orr4yglksg.fsf@livre.localdomain><20120131191312.3FA292C0AF@topped-with-meat.com>
On Jan 31, 2012, Roland McGrath <roland@hack.frob.com> wrote:
> I think we can do that right away without trouble, and get it onto
> release branches too.
*nod*
Want me to prepare a s/-fno-inline-functions/-fno-inline/ patch?
> On the libc side more generally, I've become skeptical that the generic C
> version of initfini is worth continuing with.
Maybe rather than using the generic version, we should have a Makefile
rule that generates the machine-dependent .s files for developers'
perusal in creating the machine-specific asm sources.
--
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer