Quoting "Paulo J. Matos" <pocma...@gmail.com>:
On 22/07/11 00:47, Diogo Sousa wrote:
But readers will focus on the word "Issue" here and think that there is
something missing. Perhaps there should be a footnote explaining that
glibc/eglibc has the needed support, but that other libraries might not.
I agree. It should say something as "Library Dependent", and report
glibc status.
I have to disagree, library issue means that it's an issue with the
library, not gcc.
It still makes sense to clarify the language to indicate that, depending on
the library used, this might be, in fact, a library non-issue.
Also, gcc should not list the status of a specific
library since there are so many that can be used besides glibc and it
would require someone to update it in case the status of that specific
library changes for a given feature.
I agree that trying to track every library there would be a maintenance
burden, but giving one example of a library that works is meaningful.
And, since GCC is still a GNU project, mentioning the status of GNU libc
doesn't seem that arbitrary.
