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:
pgp0FWbChGwjn.pgp
Description: PGP signature