From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 123422 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 2016 13:31:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 123408 invoked by uid 89); 4 Nov 2016 13:31:51 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_20,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=commitments, rusty, afford, burden X-HELO: mailapp01.imgtec.com Received: from mailapp01.imgtec.com (HELO mailapp01.imgtec.com) (195.59.15.196) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Nov 2016 13:31:50 +0000 Received: from HHMAIL01.hh.imgtec.org (unknown [10.100.10.19]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTPS id 0B12AB9F1A6CA; Fri, 4 Nov 2016 13:31:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [10.20.78.29] (10.20.78.29) by HHMAIL01.hh.imgtec.org (10.100.10.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.294.0; Fri, 4 Nov 2016 13:31:47 +0000 Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2016 13:31:00 -0000 From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: Pedro Alves CC: "Richard Earnshaw (lists)" , Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] gdb: Require a C++11 compiler In-Reply-To: <7437e071-2020-2e0d-0f8b-8269767d157b@redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <1477596094-3244-1-git-send-email-palves@redhat.com> <2f6931ce-8286-9b97-3a67-8228becfa424@arm.com> <7437e071-2020-2e0d-0f8b-8269767d157b@redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg00094.txt.bz2 On Tue, 1 Nov 2016, Pedro Alves wrote: > > to mess with either forcing static linking or worse, forcing uses to > > mess with non-standard LD_LIBRARY paths at run time. > > Note that just like gcc, gdb builds with -static-libstdc++ -static-libgcc. Are you sure? All my recent cross-built `gdbserver' executables failed to run without a pain of getting `libstdc++.so' in the right place on the target. Or do you mean GDB proper only? I didn't even realise there was intention to use static `libstdc++' and/or `libgcc' libraries. Also I've not been particularly happy with the project moving over to C++ let alone C++11, however I have just decided I couldn't afford the effort to go through all the discussion, which always takes time pinched from other commitments. Being a CPU target maintainer only and with my rusty 1995-vintage C++ programming skills -- making it difficult to me to assess what the advantages of modern C++ dialects might be -- I didn't want to stand in the way of core developers if they think a move to C++ will make their job easier, improving code quality and reducing maintenance burden. FWIW, Maciej