On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhni...@google.com> wrote: > On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Joseph S. Myers <jos...@codesourcery.com> > wrote: >> On Mon, 9 May 2011, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >>> Uhm, so we deadlocked, I thought the other way. I cannot really >>> express any opinion about the desirability of the feature, but the >>> configure syntax is certainly okay with me, and I gather from the >>> thread that you are fine with that as well. >> >> Given the build system changes, the gcc.c changes are OK. > > Ok for trunk then? > > I'll wait till tomorrow in case someone has additional comments on the > desirability part.
I wonder why this is a GCC specific patch and not a linker patch. Why not change the linker(s) to accept such configure option that changes its default behavior? Otherwise if people link with ld they suddenly get different hash-style. That looks wrong to me. Richard. > Thanks! > -- > Paul Pluzhnikov >
