[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: g++/libstdc++-dev [was Re: X Strike Force SVN commit: rev 69 - branches/4.3.0/sid/debian]

On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 03:36:41PM -0400, Phil Edwards wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 08:03:38AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > > Well, uh, so what?  If G++ 3.2 and 3.3 have compatible ABIs, and the
> > > standard C++ libraries are compatible at the source level, does the
> > > above really matter?
> > 
> > I don'know, if the libraries are compatible at "source level", the
> > combination of g++ and library (from the same gcc source) should be.
> The standard C++ library is compatible at the source level (i.e., recompiles
> should Just Work), with the exception of deprecated stuff and odd extensions.

All right, then I continue to suspect that the right thing for the -dev
package question is the following:

Package: xlibmesa3-glu-dev
-Depends: xlibmesa3-glu, xlibmesa-gl-dev | libgl-dev, libstdc++5-dev, libc6-dev | libc-dev
+Depends: xlibmesa3-glu, xlibmesa-gl-dev | libgl-dev, libstdc++5-dev | libstdc++-dev, libc6-dev | libc-dev

This library should be linkable against libstdc++.  Which one should be
used is a matter for Policy to specify and build-essential to enforce.

This the change I'm going to commit to the repo, so time is running out
to stop me.  :)

G. Branden Robinson                |    Kissing girls is a goodness.  It is
Debian GNU/Linux                   |    a growing closer.  It beats the
branden@debian.org                 |    hell out of card games.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |    -- Robert Heinlein

Attachment: pgpKB6GR90RX4.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: