> ok, it seems that it was my error, I recompile gcc-4.0-10012005 to verify
> the behaviour, but libgcc_s.so needs to be linked in any case. gcc-3.4
> works because I changed the specs file, but then I thougth it was due to
> the compiler flags, which wasn't the case.
OK, thanks for the clarificat
> > I must admit that my first description of the problem was a bit
> outdated,
> > but I will give you some more information: I first tried the
> > gcc-4.0-10012005 snapshot, together with the -fno-exceptions flag, and
> > there was no dynamic linking of libgcc_s.so necessary. gcc-3.4.3 works
> in
> I must admit that my first description of the problem was a bit outdated,
> but I will give you some more information: I first tried the
> gcc-4.0-10012005 snapshot, together with the -fno-exceptions flag, and
> there was no dynamic linking of libgcc_s.so necessary. gcc-3.4.3 works in
> the same
thanks for your fast answer,
I must admit that my first description of the problem was a bit outdated,
but I will give you some more information: I first tried the
gcc-4.0-10012005 snapshot, together with the -fno-exceptions flag, and there
was no dynamic linking of libgcc_s.so necessary. gcc-3.4
> I have a question about the different behaviour of the Linux and Solaris
> versions of gcc (3.4.x and 4.0.x) regarding static linking of libgcc. I do
> the static linking by adding the libgcc.a library.
Ideally you should not. Use -shared-libgcc or -static-libgcc instead.
> The Linux versions
Hello,
I have a question about the different behaviour of the Linux and Solaris
versions of gcc (3.4.x and 4.0.x) regarding static linking of libgcc. I do
the static linking by adding the libgcc.a library. The Linux versions link
libgcc statically, as do the Solaris versions. But then the Solaris
