it doesn't have to be mod_cache
and it doesn't have to be built with apxs
it just has to be built as a DSO with gcc, and it can reference libgcc.a symbols that weren't included in httpd and/or weren't exported by httpd
True 'nuff... I was simply trying to indicate a quick and dirty way to recreate the issue and show the dependency. If you do build mod_cache at the same time however, the libgcc dependency is "hidden" (it still exists and, in most cases, the required library mojo happens during the link phase so that it gets pulled in correctly at runtime).
a critical point in deciding how to address this is that it isn't just that line of code; maybe it is just that line of code with today's checkout of CVS with your current level of gcc and your configure options, but it is different line(s) of code for somebody else and their checkout and their gcc and their configure options
so changing that line of code is no solution except maybe as your own local modification which you can maintain until your gcc or your checkout or your compile/configure options change sufficiently to add a dependency elsewhere; given that, how can that source code change be checked into CVS?
Well... I've confirmed that with that change, we remove that libgcc dependency for the singular case of the code not requiring __floatdidf :)
Yes, I agree that the issue is deeper and that doing these line-by-line hacks will likely be more trouble than they are worth (eventually) but what disturbed me (as mentioned) was the "yeah, so what" attitude. Kind of defeats the whole purpose of httpd being licensed the way it is, and allowing companies like RedHat and Covalent and IBM to redistribute it if the resulting code results in dependencies that circumvent the desire of LICENSE.
I'm not gung-ho about the patch; I am gung-ho about the *reason* for the patch. ;)
