tg at gmplib.org
Mon Jan 14 23:19:40 CET 2013
David Miller <davem at davemloft.net> writes:
From: nisse at lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller)
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 22:22:28 +0100
> Furthermore, gmp needs to be portable to non-glibc systems as well. We
> have a "fat binary" machinery that tries to solve the same problem, but
> in a more portable way. Choosing between using IFUNC or the portable
> machinery at configure time sounds like it could be a lots of additional
I don't like this kind of logic.
What is the point in creating significantly beneficial facilities like
IFUNC if the greatest potential benefactors, such as libgmp, use
straw-men like this to justify not using it?
This just rude. Why don't you give valid arguments instead? We'd like
to hear your opinion!
More information about the gmp-devel