On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 09:51:01AM -0500, Todd Vierling wrote:
>
> I actually meant to clarify that.  I plan to have libgcc.a and libgcc_pic.a,
> the latter of which will be linked into shared objects on "cc -shared".
> (Currently, libgcc isn't involved on "cc -shared", which makes use of
> libgcc2 functions in dlopen()ed objects complicated.)

And as I have previously explained, that WON'T WORK.  Unless you also
explicitly prevent those symbols being exported from the shared library,
the library will still use the versions in the executable, which voids
any argument about them possibly changing in the future.  The only thing
this would do is hack around not using --force-archive for libgcc -- by
adding effectively dead code to every library.