http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55571
Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |rth at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
--- Comment #5 from Richard Henderson <rth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-12-03
15:34:18 UTC ---
I think Jakub's idea is a bit overkill. We're just in need of a
barrier, and we ought to be able to get one. Perhaps we should
be linking libgcc_s.so itself against the static libgcc?
Although I can't recall why we're placing the __sync functions
in the static library in the first place. It's not like they're
required to be unique. I guess I'll have to dig that out of the
mail archives...
