From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 36158 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2015 13:23:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 36145 invoked by uid 89); 27 Mar 2015 13:23:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_FROM_URIBL_PCCC,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-wg0-f42.google.com Received: from mail-wg0-f42.google.com (HELO mail-wg0-f42.google.com) (74.125.82.42) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 13:23:29 +0000 Received: by wgdm6 with SMTP id m6so99310423wgd.2 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 06:23:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.90.113 with SMTP id bv17mr57585746wib.3.1427462606531; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 06:23:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.21.188.214] ([62.154.173.198]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id gt4sm2821089wib.21.2015.03.27.06.23.25 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 27 Mar 2015 06:23:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <551559CA.3010101@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 14:29:00 -0000 From: Marco Atzeri User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: Fwd: Compatibility of binaries built with one version of cygwin with other versions of cygwin References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg00489.txt.bz2 On 3/27/2015 2:01 PM, Tom Kacvinsky wrote: > Question: if I build an executable/shared library on one version of > cygwin, is it guaranteed to work on later versions of cygwin, or is > that not recommended? > > I learned the difficult way that building on one version and running > on an earlier version doesn't work. My binaries are based on C++ > code, so there is a dependency on libstd++ and libgcc_s (using the > Linux names for these libraries) and that is where I think I was > getting burned. I don't think it is a problem with cygwin1.dll > > Thanks, > > Tom > compatibility is expected forward not backward. New versions may have additional features that of course are not available backward. Regards Marco -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple