Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2023-04-05 Thread Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches
On Mar 30, 2023, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Thu, 30 Mar 2023, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> How about this, does this seem useful? > I like it - helpful and easy to understand. :-) 'k, I'm putting it in, thanks On Mar 30, 2023, Arsen Arsenović wrote: > IMO, yes - in fact, the libstdc++ manual

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2023-03-30 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > How about this, does this seem useful? I like it - helpful and easy to understand. :-) Gerald

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2023-03-30 Thread Arsen Arsenović via Gcc-patches
Hi Alexandre, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches writes: > Hello, Gerald, > > On Feb 11, 2023, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > >> On Thu, 23 Jun 2022, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote: >>> Introduce -nostdlib++ option >>> >>> Using g++ to link without libstdc++, as in g++.dg/abi/pure-virtual1.C,

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2023-03-30 Thread Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches
Hello, Gerald, On Feb 11, 2023, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jun 2022, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote: >> Introduce -nostdlib++ option >> >> Using g++ to link without libstdc++, as in g++.dg/abi/pure-virtual1.C, >> is error prone, because there's no way to tell g++ to drop

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2023-02-11 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
On Thu, 23 Jun 2022, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote: > Introduce -nostdlib++ option > > Using g++ to link without libstdc++, as in g++.dg/abi/pure-virtual1.C, > is error prone, because there's no way to tell g++ to drop libstdc++ > without also dropping libc and any other libraries that

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-11-28 Thread Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches
On 9/16/22 07:52, Jason Merrill wrote: On 6/24/22 01:23, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote: On Jun 23, 2022, Alexandre Oliva wrote: Here's the patch.  Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu, also tested with a cross to aarch64-rtems6.  Ok to install? Introduce -nostdlib++ option Uhh, I

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-09-16 Thread Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches
On 9/16/22 07:52, Jason Merrill wrote: On 6/24/22 01:23, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote: On Jun 23, 2022, Alexandre Oliva wrote: Here's the patch.  Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu, also tested with a cross to aarch64-rtems6.  Ok to install? Introduce -nostdlib++ option Uhh, I

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-09-16 Thread Jason Merrill via Gcc-patches
On 6/24/22 01:23, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote: On Jun 23, 2022, Alexandre Oliva wrote: Here's the patch. Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu, also tested with a cross to aarch64-rtems6. Ok to install? Introduce -nostdlib++ option Uhh, I went ahead and installed this. The earlier

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-23 Thread Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches
On Jun 23, 2022, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Here's the patch. Regstrapped on x86_64-linux-gnu, also tested with a > cross to aarch64-rtems6. Ok to install? > Introduce -nostdlib++ option Uhh, I went ahead and installed this. The earlier patch was approved if nobody objected, and so, having

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-23 Thread Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches
On Jun 22, 2022, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Yeah, I suppose that makes sense, it's beneficial for users to avoid the > cognitive overload of dealing with equivalent options with different > spellings. I'll swallow my dislike for the spelling and change the > patch to use -nostdlib++. Here's the

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-22 Thread Fangrui Song via Gcc-patches
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 4:29 PM Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > On Jun 22, 2022, Iain Sandoe wrote: > > > It makes some sense to have the option named -nostdlib++ if a target > > might add multiple libs (and/or make other changes) for linking C++. > > if it was nostdlibc++, I'd agree. lib++ is not

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-22 Thread Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches
On Jun 22, 2022, Iain Sandoe wrote: > It makes some sense to have the option named -nostdlib++ if a target > might add multiple libs (and/or make other changes) for linking C++. if it was nostdlibc++, I'd agree. lib++ is not something that brings C++ to (my) mind. > (so, fo example, if

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-22 Thread Iain Sandoe via Gcc-patches
> On 22 Jun 2022, at 01:36, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > On Jun 21, 2022, Fangrui Song wrote: > >> Is this similar to clang -nostdlib++ ? >> When libstdc++ is selected, clang -nostdlib++ removes -lstdc++. > > Sounds like they're the same indeed, but the clang option you

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-21 Thread Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches
On Jun 21, 2022, Fangrui Song wrote: > Is this similar to clang -nostdlib++ ? > When libstdc++ is selected, clang -nostdlib++ removes -lstdc++. Sounds like they're the same indeed, but the clang option you mention makes little sense to me, so I'd rather to introduce the one that does. If

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-21 Thread Fangrui Song via Gcc-patches
On 2022-06-21, Richard Biener wrote: On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 9:53 AM Fangrui Song wrote: On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 1:43 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 7:56 AM Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > > > > > Using g++ to link without libstdc++, as in

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-21 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 9:53 AM Fangrui Song wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 1:43 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 7:56 AM Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Using g++ to link without libstdc++, as in

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-21 Thread Fangrui Song via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 1:43 AM Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 7:56 AM Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches > wrote: > > > > > > Using g++ to link without libstdc++, as in g++.dg/abi/pure-virtual1.C, > > is error prone, because there's no way to tell g++ to drop

Re: [PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-21 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 7:56 AM Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote: > > > Using g++ to link without libstdc++, as in g++.dg/abi/pure-virtual1.C, > is error prone, because there's no way to tell g++ to drop libstdc++ > without also dropping libc and any other libraries that the target >

[PATCH] Introduce -nolibstdc++ option

2022-06-20 Thread Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches
Using g++ to link without libstdc++, as in g++.dg/abi/pure-virtual1.C, is error prone, because there's no way to tell g++ to drop libstdc++ without also dropping libc and any other libraries that the target implicitly links in. This has often led to the need for manual adjustments to this