Re: Linux vs. libio

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

>>>>> "Jeffrey" == Jeffrey A Law <law@cygnus.com> writes:

    Jeffrey> If you want I'll ask for a formal vote from the steering
    Jeffrey> committee.

No, that will not be necessary.
 
We've discussed this internally at some length.  Since we're not
obligated to do the libio work at all (that was merely volunteerism on
our part, for the sake of the community at large), we've elected not
to do it.  

We'll just stick to our job: implement the new ABI support.  We'll do
that on a branch.  I belive it would be inappropriate to do the
-fnew-abi work on the mainline since that will be an incomplete
change: changing -fnew-abi and not changing libio will result in a
libstdc++ that does not work with -fnew-abi.  Of course, we will make
reasonable efforst to ensure that generic changes that come about as
part of this work appear in the mainline as well as on the branch.

It is our hope that some entity (perhaps CodeSourcery, if a customer
requests it) will eventually do the libio work, as well as the work
required to merge the -fnew-abi changes into the mainline.

I thank all of you for your time, ideas, comments and criticisms, and
I hope that the archive of this debate will assist the next person who
tackles this problem in formulating an elegant solution to the various
libio issues.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com