On Tue, 2003-04-08 at 00:09, Colin Watson wrote: > On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 11:14:31PM +0100, Shri Shrikumar wrote: > > On Mon, 2003-04-07 at 22:09, Travis Crump wrote: > > > Most of the g++ libraries built with g++-3.2 have package names ending > > > in c102. > > > > I have found this to be not true. libwxgtk2.4 for example was compiled > > with gcc-3.2. On the other hand xerces seems to have the c102 extension. > > If the library's soname version changed since the last version that was > compiled with g++-2.95, or if there was no previous version compiled > with g++-2.95, then the "c102" bit isn't necessary, otherwise it is. > > See: > > http://people.debian.org/~rmurray/c++transition.html > > > > It shouldn't matter if something was compiled with gcc-2.95 vs > > > gcc-3.2 as far as I understand it. > > > > I found that I couldn't link an application which was compiled with > > g++-2.95 with libraries compiled with g++-3.2 > > For C++, yes, the ABI has changed (symbol mangling, for starters). The C > ABI should be fine. Colin, Thanks for that. The link answered all my questions. Regards, Shri -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shri Shrikumar U R Byte Solutions I.T. Consultant Edinburgh, Scotland Tel: 0845 644 4745 Email: shri@urbyte.com Web: www.urbyte.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part