From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27899 invoked by alias); 9 Jul 2009 11:41:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 27890 invoked by uid 22791); 9 Jul 2009 11:41:48 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-ew0-f225.google.com (HELO mail-ew0-f225.google.com) (209.85.219.225) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:41:41 +0000 Received: by ewy25 with SMTP id 25so106402ewy.8 for ; Thu, 09 Jul 2009 04:41:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.210.137.18 with SMTP id k18mr8331529ebd.47.1247139698390; Thu, 09 Jul 2009 04:41:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.2.99? (cpc2-cmbg8-0-0-cust61.cmbg.cable.ntl.com [82.6.108.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 23sm1986985eya.46.2009.07.09.04.41.37 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 09 Jul 2009 04:41:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A55DA6F.2090001@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:41:00 -0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Basile Starynkevitch CC: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: libiberty should be a shared library when cc1 has plugin enabled. References: <20090709084949.GA27192@hector.lesours> In-Reply-To: <20090709084949.GA27192@hector.lesours> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2009-07/txt/msg00159.txt.bz2 Basile Starynkevitch wrote: > Hello All, > > Perhaps libiberty should be a shared library, not a static one, linked from > cc1, when GCC has plugin enabled. > We might also artificially add a reference to each libiberty function from > cc1. Or link it into cc1 et al. using "--whole-archive". > If we did link dynamically libiberty.so: We would also have to install it, and start worrying about library API versioning and backward compatibility, or at any rate I think that's the main reason why this has not been done in the pasy (cf. libbfd). cheers, DaveK