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

["H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Wed, Jul 12, 2000 at 07:44:02PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> > Can you tell me who are going to maintain Linux for years to come?
> > We, VA Linux, have sold so many Linux machines. What do we do? The
> > answer is you don't have to worry about it. Someone will maintain it,
> > one way or the other, just like gcc, kernel, X11, glibc, binutils,
> > ...... libgcc.so is no different.
> 
> That's not a convincing response. For each of the packages you cited,
> there is some person or organization supporting it, in the sense of
> ongoing development (gcc steering committee, Linus Torvalds, XFree
> Consortium, Ulrich Drepper, Cygnus/Redhat). Those I trust that they
> will be there five years from now, or hand it over before they go
> away.
> 
> Something being "Linux" is not a guarantee for ongoing support; many
> projects have been abandoned, or stagnate forever (my NTFS driver is
> an example; another is the bpe editor).
> 
> Are you saing VA Linux would commit to maintain libgcc.so? That would
> be convincing also.
> 

I don't speak for VA Linux. But I can ensure you that VA Linux has a vast
interest in an actively maintained Linux system. A working libgcc.so
belongs to that category. I will bet Red Hat, SuSE, ..... and many other
Linux system software vendors will be very interested in it also.

BTW, I guess Ulrich Drepper wants a reasonable libgcc.so solution for glibc
too.


H.J.