On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 5:21 AM, E.N. virgo <cireyapmin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> 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. > I'll take on the review, but you really should consider becoming involved in Fedora as a packager, as any packager can review another packagers packages proposed for inclusion into Fedora. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
