On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 10:52:21PM +0100, Arsen Arsenović via Gcc wrote:
> Simon Sobisch <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Bad side (the understandable reason Jim dislikes that): a user may code
> > something that doesn't work - not sure if there are any GCC / glibc parts
> > which
> > behave similar.
>
> It's certainly possible to create builds of GCC with some features
> missing (IIRC it's possible that libstdc++ may not be able to do some
> things in absence of iconv, for instance, but don't quote me on that).
>
> It's a fairly reasonable and frequent compromise to leave some features
> as non-operational without extra libs present.
Yeah, not just missing iconv, but missing thread friendly locale support,
missing C99 support in C library resulting in libstdc++ having more limited
support, ...
Jakub
