Agreed on the conservative versioning for reasons of minimal requirements and maximal compatibility - this is (was?) always a conscious goal. Ta, --Adam
On 19 August 2014 12:27, Henri Beauchamp <sl...@free.fr> wrote: > On Tue, 19 Aug 2014 09:37:36 +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote: > > > > Am Montag, 18. August 2014, 14:01:45 schrieb Nicky Perian: > > > > >> I ran into an issue with boost built with gcc 4-6 and viewer > compiling goo > > >> 4-7. rebuilt boost on 4.7 and no more problems. > > > > Hi, > > > > that worked. Now that needs to go into the official sources... > > Hopefully not !... > > The current Linux builds of the viewer and pre-built libraries are > compiled with gcc 4.6, which also imposes a minimal requirement on > the target systems' libstdc++ version (6.0.16). > > If LL were to provide pre-built libraries compiled with gcc v4.7, > then the "old" (like 2 years old *only*) Linux distributions would > become incapable of running the resulting viewer. > > You should instead keep a partition (or a VirtualBox virtual machine) > with a build-system matching LL's one (i.e. using gcc 4.6.4 and its > associated libstdc++). > > Henri. > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges >
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
