Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As I said in my previous message, we are NOT losing __cxa_atexit. > By dropping the current patch we are using the __cxa_atexit > provided by glibc >= 2.2 instead of the one provided by gcc itself.
I understand that. The patch is still needed. > The using gcc to provide __cxa_atexit is totally unneccessary with > the newer glibc's. Having gcc use __cxa_atexit may be unnecessary; activating flag_use_cxa_atexit is not. > If we want to be difficult we can keep the patch but I think we are > on our own in fixing the conflict between the gcc provided > __cxa_atexit and binutils. The only reason to keep the patch is if > we had an OS which didn't provide __cxa_atexit through glibc > (i.e. one that used an alternative to glibc for its libc or was > using glibc < 2.2). That is nonsense. On a C library that does not have the __cxa_atexit entry point, using the patch would be incorrect, since the generated code relies on libc providing that entry point. Regards, Martin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
