Re: fixed libstdc++5 package

[Alex Romosan <romosan@sycorax.lbl.gov>]

Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de> writes:

> Alex Romosan writes:
>> shouldn't everything be consistent (the development package and the
>> library)? can somebody please explain why this decision was made?
>> thanks.
>
> The ABI of gcc-3.2's libstdc++ is compatible to gcc-3.3's libstdc++
> (modulo bugs). gcc-3.3's libstdc++ introduces new symbols only.
>
> What do you want to be consistent?

the -dev package and the library package. the abi might be the same,
but they are obviously making changes to symbols in 3.2 not only
adding new symbols for 3.3. i just think it would make more sense that
when compiling with gcc 3.2 (which is the default compiler for debian
unstable) to actually link against libstdc++ from 3.2 not from 3.3
(and then the recent breakage would've probably not happened).

--alex--

-- 
| I believe the moment is at hand when, by a paranoiac and active |
|  advance of the mind, it will be possible (simultaneously with  |
|  automatism and other passive states) to systematize confusion  |
|  and thus to help to discredit completely the world of reality. |