From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19449 invoked by alias); 15 Oct 2002 04:02:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 19413 invoked from network); 15 Oct 2002 04:02:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) (66.60.148.227) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Oct 2002 04:02:11 -0000 Received: from warlock.codesourcery.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9F3xVh01202; Mon, 14 Oct 2002 20:59:31 -0700 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 23:07:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell To: Nathan Sidwell , Jan Hubicka cc: Qiong Cai , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: new edge coverage profiler on gcc 3.3 Message-ID: <9480000.1034649086@localhost> In-Reply-To: <3DAACAA7.9020209@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00779.txt.bz2 > (Separately) I think we should break them out of libgcc into a libgcov, > so that they work with a shared link of libgcc. We can have a spec which > turns -fcoverage into -lgcov. This is appropriate for 3.4, but is it > too for 3.3? I think you're asking "too late". If so, the answer is yes, it's too late. :-( -- Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com