On 14 September 2016 at 15:26, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-09-14 at 10:13 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> The real problem is that your library will depend on a newer libstdc++
>> but that's orthogonal to the ABI changes. Statically linking it is one
>> solution, deploying the newer libstdc++
On Wed, 2016-09-14 at 10:13 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 11 September 2016 at 22:38, Paul Smith wrote:
> > I wonder if someone can comment on this situation: I'll do some testing
> > but I likely can't test everything.
> >
> > I'm creating DSO's for GNU/Linux with GCC 4.9.2 right now. I wan
On 11 September 2016 at 22:38, Paul Smith wrote:
> I wonder if someone can comment on this situation: I'll do some testing
> but I likely can't test everything.
>
> I'm creating DSO's for GNU/Linux with GCC 4.9.2 right now. I want to
> upgrade to GCC 6.2.0. My code is written in C++. I'm aware o
I wonder if someone can comment on this situation: I'll do some testing
but I likely can't test everything.
I'm creating DSO's for GNU/Linux with GCC 4.9.2 right now. I want to
upgrade to GCC 6.2.0. My code is written in C++. I'm aware of the C++
STL ABI break in GCC 5.x.
I have users who will
