My proposal for the libgcc runtime ABI (ia64 gcc/glibc is broken.)

[Ulrich Drepper]

"Martin v. Loewis" <martin@loewis.home.cs.tu-berlin.de> writes:

> If you think you (as the glibc group, or as the Ulrich Drepper
> individual) can maintain this over the years to come - why don't you
> just go ahead and do it?

I've never said I want to do this.  I have enough to do.

> It is likely that gcc maintainers will add functions to libgcc as they
> please, and that the code generated by gcc will rely on these
> functions being inside libgcc. So how should gcc proceed on a system
> where these new functions are not present in the system libgcc?

The libgcc ABI cannot simply be changed without good reason and
preparation.  This should be clear meanwhile.  There must be much
finer coordination.

-- 
---------------.                          ,-.   1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper  \    ,-------------------'   \  Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Red Hat          `--' drepper at redhat.com   `------------------------