On Thu, Jul 06, 2017 at 04:06:55AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > > or there are cases when libraries built against > > one libc is used with another (e.g. musl can > > mostly use a libstdc++ compiled against glibc > > on x86_64) > > This happens every time when a new version of a function > is added to glibc. musl has to deal with it.
That's not a problem I really care about, but again, I don't think this change is necessary or beneficial. > > i think introducing new libc<->compiler abi > > This is no different from adding a new version of a function > to glibc. > > > should be done conservatively when it is really > > necessary and from Rich's mail it seems there > > is no need for new abi here. > > > > See: > > https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2017-07/msg00086.html I don't see how the necessity follows from there. Rich