The libgcc.so for glibc initiative
H . J . Lu
hjl@lucon.org
Thu Jul 13 19:24:00 GMT 2000
On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 01:12:21AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > >
> > > Last time when I tried it, they didn't wany any solution which only
> > > works for glibc. They want a solution which works on all targets gcc
> > > supports. That is why I said the solution they chose would fall far
> > > short for glibc.
>
> What's wrong with requesting a solution that isn't Linux/glibc
> specific for a problem that isn't Linux/glibc specific?
>
Nothing if you can find one.
> > I had a discussion on this point with another gcc SC member,
> > David Edelsohn. He is of the opinion that looking at libgcc as a
> > per-platform item is a valid viewpoint, and agrees that maybe
> > there needs to be a version done for gibc. He's not the only one
> > who feels that way -- don't know if he represents the majority or
> > not.
>
> I am very glad to hear that.
>
> Looking at libgcc as a per-platform item may be a valid viewpoint, but
> certainly not the only one. There's a huge part of the current libgcc
> that's pretty much per-architecture. There's also a lot of C++
> support code for which I cannot find a reason not to share among
> platforms.
>
Do you have an alternative? I am not against a solution which works
for all targets and also meets the glibc requirement.
Thanks.
H.J.
More information about the Libc-hacker
mailing list