Re: ICU transition status - boost sonames
On Dec 18, 2007 12:45 AM, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 11:46:31PM -0800, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > Back when monotone used a bunch of boost modules that included
> > libraries (as opposed to just headers), the upstream mailing list
> > would regularly get reports that the binary segfaulted on most
> > operations, and the cause was *invariably* that the user had
> > hand-built boost, upgraded gcc, and then hand-built monotone against
> > the boost libraries built with the old gcc (using static linkage, so
> > the boost soname convention didn't stop them). We saw this a few
> > times going between gcc *patch levels*!
>
> Which patch levels, specifically? g++ ABI stability was certainly an issue
> prior to gcc 4.0, but there aren't supposed to have been any ABI changes
> since then. If there are, we probably have a much bigger problem than just
> boost.
Looking back through the mailing list archives, all the cases I can
find involved gcc 3.4 and/or 3.3. So perhaps this is no longer a
problem. I am not confident of it, though.
zw
Reply to: