This is the mail archive of the
libc-hacker@cygnus.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: glibc2.1 [offtopic]
- To: hjl@lucon.org (H.J. Lu)
- Subject: Re: glibc2.1 [offtopic]
- From: Zack Weinberg <zack@rabi.columbia.edu>
- Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 12:31:28 -0500
- cc: libc-hacker@cygnus.com, egcs@egcs.cygnus.com
On Thu, 11 Feb 1999 08:08:17 -0800 (PST), H.J. Lu wrote:
>> >
>> >It works for me. You never gave me a convincing example to show
>> >it is broken. Maybe we have different opinions on what "broken"
>> >means in this context.
>>
>> "It works for me" != "it works for everyone".
>>
>> You localized a bunch of symbols that have been in libgcc since GCC1
>> and will never go away. Things like _muldi3. Those symbols are
>> re-exported by libc. We can't take them out without breaking every
>> binary that needs them.
>>
>
>I have compiled glibc 2.1 with my egcs 1.1.1/Linux and installed
>it on several RedHat 5.2 systems. Can you tell me which binary I
>should check?
I can't find one, which indicates how obscure the problem is. The
characteristics are: program linked with libstdc++ compiled by a
compiler without your patch, run on system with libstdc++ compiled
with your patch.
zw