This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: RFC: requiring GCC >= 4.7 to build glibc
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Cc: <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 20:48:41 +0000
- Subject: Re: RFC: requiring GCC >= 4.7 to build glibc
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1508201344140 dot 30940 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <5612CBD3 dot 9040601 at redhat dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1510052025330 dot 17637 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <5612E073 dot 7030007 at redhat dot com>
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 10/05/2015 10:34 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> > Are you saying that binutils 2.22 support is in fact already broken (which
> > is something I'd take as evidence to justify such a move - that people are
> > actually using features in glibc that 2.22 doesn't have)?
>
> Yes, binutils 2.22 is broken on x86_64, and I don't think 2.23 will fix
> it. There are 2.23 versions versions with backported features which
> work. But I think we currently require upstream binutils 2.24 at least,
> maybe newer. We have a similar problem on s390x, with even tighter
> requirements.
sysdeps/s390/configure.ac has an explicit check for 2.24 or later.
Fixing glibc to work with 2.23 on x86_64 may make sense (depending on the
nature of the patch - if it's too complicated we could decide explicitly
requiring 2.24 or later is better). Making it work with 2.22 is less
obviously useful since time-based upgrades would indicate 2.22 support can
be officially obsoleted.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com