Re: [Tinycc-devel] Missing symbol when compiling in -static

[grischka]

RoboTux wrote:
> But one concern remains: do we really want to make tinycc depends on gcc ?  
> That sounds a bit weird to force the user to install gcc even if he only wants 
> to compile with tinycc. 

Well, if you want to solve _that_ problem then you'd need to talk to
the libc devs why their /usr/lib/libc.a depends on SEH support code
that is buried in the private gcc subdir.

> On the other hand, provide dummy functions is 
> perfectly possible and doesn't introduce regression, even if the functions 
> aren't functional. On the contrary, they improve usability of the software 
> since it would allow many programs, which don't use the 4 undefined symbols 
> neither directly, nor indirectly, to be compiled statically with tinycc.

> Thus, I'd like to commit dummy functions which anyone can then transform in
> fully functional ones.

I guess to be "fully functional" this could easily mean several versions,
such as one for each gcc version that gnu/linux systems are compiled with.

Well, maybe I just don't understand.  Can we make "tcc -static" work with
libgcc_eh.a, say somewhat easily?

--- grischka

> Thomas Preud'homme