On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 05:08:21PM -0400, John W. Eaton wrote: > On 9-Sep-2005, Laurent Bonnaud wrote: > > | > Is libstdc++ also completely compatible? Have there been absolutely > | > no changes that could affect layout of class members? > | > | This question is no longer a concern since my tests have shown that g++ > | 3.4 is worse than g++ 4.0. > > But unless we are absolutely sure that everything is compatible from > one release to another, Yes, we are. See Matthias Klose's announcements regarding the C++ ABI transition for etch. > In the old days, the I think Octave was configured with something like > CC=gcc-4.0 CXX=g++-4.0 F77=g77-4.0 > so that these names would be put into the mkoctfile script. That way, > when someone later ran mkoctfile, they would be sure to get the same > version of the compiler that was used to build the Octave binary they > were using. > Yes, I would prefer to not have to fix the compiler versions, but > unless we know that they are compatible, I see no other option. g++ is going to point to a compiler with an ABI compatible to that of g++-4.0 for the length of the etch release cycle. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature