On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 07:02 -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > Basile Starynkevitch <bas...@starynkevitch.net> writes: > I think it would be fairly difficult to construct a case where a plugin > cared about the exact compiler, rather than the exact version and > configuration. The only reason that the PCH support cares about the > exact compiler is that it more or less takes a memory dump of the > allocated GC memory.
I agree, but a plugin could also do likewise, e.g. write memory contents in some kind of persistent storage. Beside, the hack is quite easy to implement (just add executable_checksum to lto1 binary, or perhaps generate an md5sum of most GCC files and store it). While I can understand the reason, I still find strange and counter-intuitive that lto1 lacks executable_checksum that cc1 has. Cheers. -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/ email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359 8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France *** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***
