>> Alas, clang++ now needs to link against the GCC ABI to successfully compile. > what actual problem is caused by that? Please read instead “Alas, clang++ currently needs to link against the GCC ABI to successfully compile.” The problem is that one might want to use libstdc++ (GCC) and libc++ (LLVM) along with GCC ABI and LLVM ABI, respectively. Fedora currently enables the GCC case, but one has to fall back to GCC ABI even when using an LLVM library. > which clang instrumentation tool requires libc++abi? Not an instrumentation in particular, I ran into problems when trying to LD_PRELOAD some instrumented binaries and founding they needed libc++abi. > there are subtle corner cases breaking exception handling: > > https://whatofhow.wordpress.com/2016/03/01/libclibcabi-on-linux/ Blog post amended in the comments. Overall, I am not willing to argue about C++ best coding/debugging practices. I am rather asking if there is any possibility that package review request (BZ1332306) stalled for ages would get some care. Had I been a packager, sure I would try to handle the review process myself, but I am not a packager. It would be nice to have some contributor giving the libc++abi package some time, I am quite sure there are many people who will be very grateful. Thanks. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
