From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@upchuck.cygnus.com>
To: Zack Weinberg <zack@rabi.columbia.edu>
Cc: egcs@egcs.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: __register_frame_info & shared library compatibility 
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 23:15:00 -0000
Message-ID: <5314.923890600@upchuck>
References: <199904101341.JAA27027@blastula.phys.columbia.edu>
X-SW-Source: 1999-04n/msg00397.html
Message-ID: <19990430231500.PIsIZJCDNIVw1YY9ekCbhdXSY15tezdZiO0ppahaXPI@z>

  In message < 199904101341.JAA27027@blastula.phys.columbia.edu >you write:
  > >This problem can be solved by making the reference to the frame function
  > >in the crt files a normal (non-weak) reference again.  This will not break
  > >existing code.
  > 
  > This is technically true, however you will break people's
  > expectations.  Libc has been going around telling everyone that they
  > need to compile their libraries with gcc 2.7 or else apply the
  > controversial patch to egcs.  Oh, and the patch is official in egcs
  > 1.1.2.  From libc's point of view, any library that was not compiled
  > as above is broken; it fails to conform to the de facto ABI.
It does not matter if you and the glibc maintainers consider this a glibc
problem.  It is NOT ACCEPTABLE for egcs to break binary compatibility in
the manner that happened with egcs-1.1.2.  Period.

jeff