Re: GCC-3.0.1 can't compile Glibc-2.2.4

[Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>]

On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 10:36:47AM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 12:22:10AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > 
> > > Aport from the problem indicated above, there's no point in installing
> > > Jakub's patch as long as libstdc++ still contains a copy of
> > > __frame_state_for.  A remedy was briefly discussed on libc-alpha,
> > 
> > I believe it is a task for distribution vendors to fix up their
> > compatibility compilers (note all of them need to be fixed, not just
> > 2.95.latest).
> > 
> > > see:
> > > 
> > >   http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-alpha/2001-09/msg00017.html
> > > 
> > > and subsequent messages.  I'm not sure concensus has been reached on
> > > this issue.
> > 
> > I think rth's suggested -( -lc -lgcc -) may be costly (as libc symbol count
> > is not exactly small), will need to check what ld will actually do in that
> > case.
> 
> Can't we make __frame_state_for in libgcc.a from gcc 2 STV_HIDDEN? Of
> course, we should only do it for Linux. It shouldn't be too hard to do.
> I can provide a patch if needed.

You need the exact opposite: __frame_state_for should be in libc.so only and
not in any other shared library or binary, eventhough it is in libgcc.a.
Similarly for frame registry/deregistry.

	Jakub