From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14687 invoked by alias); 6 Jul 2002 12:37:53 -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 14677 invoked from network); 6 Jul 2002 12:37:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO merlin.nerim.net) (62.212.99.186) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Jul 2002 12:37:49 -0000 Received: (from gdr@localhost) by merlin.nerim.net (8.11.6/8.11.6/SuSE Linux 0.5) id g66CaI507937; Sat, 6 Jul 2002 14:36:18 +0200 To: "Joseph S. Myers" Cc: Andreas Jaeger , Subject: Re: C++ binary compatibility between GCC 3.1 and GCC 3.2? References: From: Gabriel Dos Reis In-Reply-To: "Joseph S. Myers"'s message of "Sat, 6 Jul 2002 11:42:37 +0100 (BST)" 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 06:40:00 -0000 Message-ID: X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg00264.txt.bz2 "Joseph S. Myers" writes: | On Thu, 4 Jul 2002, Andreas Jaeger wrote: | | > What will this mean for distributions and for production usage of GCC | > 3.1? I fear this means that folks cannot easily upgrade from GCC 3.1 | > to GCC 3.2 since C++ is incompatible and all C++ libraries that are | > needed for development need to be relinked. | | Where does libstdc++ fit into this? The library is not covered by the ABI requirement; but we try hard to retain ABI compatibility. | Is libstdc++ yet ready to be binary | compatible between successive major releases? No, we're currently far from that -- but we're striving for that goal. | If not, how useful is | binary compatibility of the underlying C++ ABI? People have been using third-party libary in place of libstdc++-v3. Also, most of codes in libstc++-v3 are in headers (template definitions) so the issue is less sensitive than with the compiler. -- Gaby