From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id BCF7E385840B; Sun, 21 Jul 2024 14:35:24 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BCF7E385840B
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1721572524;
	bh=uUbEPtI7n6mLmYpxpqhjmtGawyu55Q9Rmhh1RiyXUYc=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=pw/KN5/OQXZBMaenN1dggj2q/utqCyIUHAqHZCHp3I+Dv0YLTNYu7nf68Kb9JMZom
	 uCxMejj6IurShI5dYE9LTIpq33jlA8pDFDt6s11A1gTEgVCKp3/F7BF6SBlhGevKB+
	 dzkOXn6tOdLgiRxshavpVSdYlygJ8EcR7ss5Jy+M=
From: "unlvsur at live dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/115907] Libstdc++ and GCC itself should avoid glibc
 above 2.34 dependency
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2024 14:35:24 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: unlvsur at live dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-115907-4-by3fvRK8Af@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-115907-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-115907-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D115907

--- Comment #44 from cqwrteur <unlvsur at live dot com> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #42)
> (In reply to frankhb1989 from comment #41)
> > I ran into exact the same trouble of C23 missing symbols on old systems=
. In
> > my case it is a custom build (with tailored source) of libfreeimage whi=
ch
> > has some calls to `sscanf` pulling the unwanted symbol references (to
> > `__isoc23_sscanf@GLIBC_2.38`) into the library
>=20
> That is not a glibc issue but rather you are thinking glibc will be forwa=
rds
> compatible; glibc is not and never can be; this is true for almost all OS
> out there (Mac OS has a similar issue though they provide sysroots with a=
ll
> needed headers/libraries so it is slightly easier to handle rather than y=
ou
> need to go out and find one). It is definitely backwards compatiable. If =
you
> want to build a program that runs on older systems you 100% need to use t=
he
> earliest version of glibc to link (and use headers from) against rather t=
han
> the newest version.

https://github.com/trcrsired/glibc/commit/4a724a45761fe27000247267d6ea02cb6=
4b17b3c#diff-e1c081599cb4df1d7224ee161959d04457b256c4b269e428baec5a6d34e630=
d1

My patch just works perfectly. Don't know what's your opposition. I am not =
even
suggest an ABI lock down or something=