On Fri, Apr 30, 2004 at 07:43:23PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > Daniel Jacobowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> The soname of libstdc++ changed upstream from 3.3. and 3.4, and the > >> compiler implements a somewhat different flavor of C++ (it's much > >> closer to the standard now). > > > > However, with symbol versioning and shared libgcc implemented in both > > 3.3 and 3.4, I don't think a transition is actually necessary - I > > believe things will work OK with both versions linked in. For most > > architectures, at least. > > > > Do you have some reason to think this is wrong? > > I don't think this will work in general because a DSO might expose the > layout of objects provided by the standard library in its public > interface. That's part of the reason why I think that symbol > versioning is way overrated in some circles. 8-) > > However, if the library just exports a C API, it should be okay.
Not only this, but in fact, the layout of nearly every object exposed by the standard library hasn't changed. So in practice, I expect it to work :) Not the most confidence-inspiring, perhaps. -- Daniel Jacobowitz
