Re: Do symbols make sense for C++
On 2012-01-26, Thomas Weber <tweber@debian.org> wrote:
> I'm currently creating symbol files for Octave in Debian. And quite
> frankly, the way symbol files for C++ libraries are handled and
> (especially) documented is totally frustrating.
>
> There's exactly zero precise documentation on how to maintain symbol
> files there. When the topic is brought up on mailing list, people point
> at some tools from the KDE packages, but still there's no documentation
> on the problem itself. The best example is dpkg-gensymbols(1) itself:
did you read the link I posted? That's currently the best docs we have
for pkgkde-symbolshelper. Better docs is always a nice thing to have.
Please help improve it.
> Yeah, great. Which instantiations cannot be marked as optional and how
> do I recognize them? And if it's actually impossible to maintain symbol
> files for C++ libraries (as Florian Weimer has claimed in this thread),
> why doesn't the manpage just say so?
It is not at all impossible to maintain symbol files for c++ libraries.
/Sune
Reply to: