On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 01:17:30PM +0200, Martin Husemann wrote: > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 01:12:30PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > It can be used to provide different implementations in one library based > > on hardware support etc, without adding an additional layer of > > indirection like the function pointer dance we do in src/common for the > > atomics. > > Like we do for libm in ld.so.conf?
That involves more than one library, i.e. it is not self-contained. > > It also makes it possible to move symbols from one DSO to > > another without breaking the ABI if the old location uses symbol > > versioning. That's the original motivation here -- to be able to gut > > libgcc_s.so without requiring the major bump. > > I prefer the major bump! Given that it involves a libc major bump as well: not at this time. Joerg
