On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 03:45:46AM +0100, Paolo Carlini wrote: > Richard, sorry, I don't agree, on second thought. You are not > considering that the idea is using a "smart" libgcc, a la glibc, as per > Mark and Uli messages.
Yes, I am. I stand by my statement: libgcc is the wrong level at which to attack this. If you want to make libstdc++ auto-detect the machine, that's fine. But it has to be in code specific to that library. r~
