https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104248
--- Comment #3 from Mathieu Malaterre <mathieu.malaterre at gmail dot com> --- @Andreas the specific issue I am raising is the difference between the approach of riscv vs armel. The riscv team is taking the responsability for putting the missing `-latomic`, while armel expect the user to understand how c11 atomics are implemented on a particular architecture and fix the link line at the build system level (eg. cmake / meson ...). In summary: what is the risk (if any) to update the gcc spec file on armel ?