From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com>
To: hjl@lucon.org (H.J. Lu)
Cc: gcc2@cygnus.com, egcs@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: gcc 2.8.0 is broken on linux/x86 and more bug 
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 03:55:00 -0000
Message-id: <17304.881914983@hurl.cygnus.com>
References: <m0xgQDb-0004ecC@ocean.lucon.org>
X-SW-Source: 1997-12/msg00720.html

  In message < m0xgQDb-0004ecC@ocean.lucon.org >you write:
  > >   > I think that is what my patch does. It keeps the old name and
  > >   > appends _new to new interface. It seems to work for me.
  > > I don't believe it handles the "free" issue correctly, then again, I'm
  > > not real familiar with that code.
  > > 
  > > Please explain to me how it works if both register_frame and
  > > register_frame_new are are called by one program.  
  > > 
  > 
  > How does register_frame/register_frame_new get called? They are
  > called by crtbegin.o/collect2. User doesn't use them directly.
  > Since they are under our control, we always call the right one.
But we don't have control over any programs or libraries that were
compiled with the old interfaces right?  Thus, it's possible to get
code which uses both.  Thus we have to be able to handle both right?

Or are you saying that a library called with the old version would be
entirely self contained and thus we don't have to worry about mixing?


Please be explicit so that we can all understand the problem and work
towards a correct solution and avoid having to go through this again.


jeff