On 27 February 2008 16:16, Brian Dessent wrote:
> That would be fine if it were even possible to build a shared libgcc.
> FSF gcc won't even do this, nor will it build shared libstdc++, etc.
> MinGW's gcc 4.2 has a humongous local patch that backports a bunch of
> stuff from 4.3 as well as using a
Reini Urban wrote:
> About the shared libgcc:
> Since this problem will not go away until we decide to keep the old and slow
> WINAPI compatible SJLJ (hopefully not), we can just add this libgcc as
> Base package.
> Similar to the msvcrt.dll in the windows world.
That would be fine if it were eve
2008/2/26, Brian Dessent:
> Sigh. You'll have to search the archives. There are a number of things
> preventing a move to gcc 4.x as the system compiler. The main snags are
> lack of shared libgcc (which breaks C++ EH with shared libraries) and
> the everlasting debate about if and how to tra
David Arnstein wrote:
> This process generated many stack dumps. There were also test suite
> failures, not surprising in light of the stack dumps. Finally, my
> Windows Application Event Log filled with error messages from Cygwin.
They're messages from cygserver, not Cygwin. I can't really see
4 matches
Mail list logo
