incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Liviu Nicoara <>
Subject Re: STDCXX forks
Date Sat, 01 Sep 2012 21:24:06 GMT

On Sep 1, 2012, at 1:52 PM, Stefan Teleman wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Liviu Nicoara <> wrote:
>> [...]
>> This pretty much sums up my first impression.
> [...]
> To begin with: the compiler flags/GNUmakefile changes are very
> specific to the SunPro compilers and to our internal build system.
> These changes are most likely not suitable for inclusion in the
> canonical stdcxx, except maybe for the sunpro.config changes, in case
> someone would like to be able to replicate our builds. I'd like to
> mention that, in Solaris, Apache stdcxx is a "system library".

Good point. 

> About the Standard C Library forwarding header files: these changes
> are specfic to Solaris. The reason behind them is: the Solaris
> architectural rules, which can be best summarized as: "there can be
> only one of each". In other words, it is Verboten, in Solaris, to
> duplicate the Standard C Library header files (or any other header
> file for that matter). The Solaris Standard C Library header files are
> C++-clean - they are required to be so, by the same architectural
> rules. Again, these changes are specific to Solaris, and are probably
> not portable across other implementations. I know for a fact that they
> are not portable for either the GCC or Intel compilers (with which I
> test regularly on Linux, in addition to SunPro).
> So these two groups of changesets can be ignored.

Got it.

> I opened yesterday STDCXX-1066:
> about the pthread_mutex_t/pthread_cond_t alignment on SPARCV8. I'll
> have patches done this weekend. Achtung: the patchset is very large
> and touches a very large number of files. It's strange that I didn't
> get an email about STDCXX-1066.

Acknowledged. I have seen the individual patches on those two websites.

> I'd also like to talk about STDCXX-1056:
> which has already had an initial discussion, and for which I have
> attached  a patch. This issue also addresses (indirectly) linkage when
> building with GCC. On the recent versions of GCC that I have tested
> with, passing -supc++ on link line automatically links with the GNU
> (on top of linking with stdcxx), and that just bad.

I briefly looked at it, will delve into it later.

> And then I'll have to cross reference the patches which refer to our
> internal bug numbers because most of them are quite old and right now,
> off the top of my head, I can't remember what they are. :-)



View raw message