From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27851 invoked by alias); 6 Jul 2002 13:28:01 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 27833 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2002 13:27:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO merlin.nerim.net) (62.212.99.186) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Jul 2002 13:27:58 -0000 Received: (from gdr@localhost) by merlin.nerim.net (8.11.6/8.11.6/SuSE Linux 0.5) id g66DQoZ08087; Sat, 6 Jul 2002 15:26:50 +0200 To: Jakub Jelinek Cc: Mark Mitchell , "obrien@freebsd.org" , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: C++ binary compatibility between GCC 3.1 and GCC 3.2? References: <18910000.1025898677@gandalf.codesourcery.com> <19510000.1025899870@gandalf.codesourcery.com> <20020705143353.D89951@dragon.nuxi.com> <26670000.1025905035@gandalf.codesourcery.com> <20020706144023.W20867@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> From: Gabriel Dos Reis In-Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek's message of "Sat, 6 Jul 2002 14:40:23 +0200" Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 07:20:00 -0000 Message-ID: X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00267.txt.bz2 Jakub Jelinek writes: | But if 3.1.2 was called 3.2, it would not be minor release but major, thus | could introduce ABI incompatibilities. As I understand people are objecting to having 3.1.x not binrary compatible with 3.2.y. | Apple could stay at 3.1, while Linux vendors, FreeBSD and whoever | is currently preparing 3.1.x based distribution could still switch to this | 3.2 and be (hopefully) binary compatible with the upcoming 3.3 | (current trunk). -- Gaby