[SM-Discuss] new glibc hits stable
f.bridault at fra.net
Sat Feb 26 04:22:42 EST 2005
Le Samedi 26 Février 2005 01:21, Eric Sandall a écrit :
> Quoting Andrew <afrayedknot at thefrayedknot.armory.com>:
> > It would be hard to have TRIGGERS for all the C++ spells, but
> > certainly do-able. On the other hand, not every gcc re-cast includes a
> > binary incompatibility. Im pretty sure cleanse --fix is part of a system
> > update too so it would/should catch these issues, although the sys-update
> > would take a fairly significant amount of time.
> > I dont want to sound negative but binary incompatibility is not a
> > pretty thing...I think that too little attention is paid to having
> > backwards compatibility in the C++ ABI, maybe thats a hard problem or
> > something, or the last attempt was too restrictive or C++ is just too
> > big of a language to get it right on the first try, I dont pay attention
> > much to C++, Im just guessing.
> > As a consequence though, to the end users (smgl for example), everyone
> > who builds stuff from source gets the shaft. You'd get the same problems
> > if you used a binary distro and then updated to 3.4 then started building
> > a few things here and there, they wouldnt work and all your binary
> > packages would either need to be updated (and their probably arent
> > updates), or you'd have to give up using gcc 3.4 until their were. Or on
> > other source distros youd have similar (if not the same) issues, its not
> > really a unique to smgl problem, and unfortunatly we cant just make the
> > incompatibility disappear without having to rebuild a bunch of stuff that
> > was broken by it.
> > Also, I thought it was generally common practice to sorcery rebuild
> > after a gcc update to take advantage of better code optimization in
> > the new compiler (and to just get everything uniformly built from the
> > same compiler). Maybe its less of an issue than it was in the 2.95 ->
> > 3.0 phase of gcc, but I thought thats just what people did when they
> > updated their compiler...
> > -Andrew
> Shall I add to our FAQ the notion that you should do a `sorcery rebuild`
> after updating gcc/g++ (not just a recompile, but an update) or at least a
> `cleanse --fix`?
> We could then have that as our "Official" remedy for gcc/g++ updates and
> C/C++ API/ABI incompatibilities.
It should be indeed good to add a small note on the FAQ. This is the first
thing to do. This way you could then say RTFF for people who complains about
that ( like me ;-p ) ;-p
> Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
> eric at sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
> http://eric.sandall.us/ | SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @ WSU
> http://counter.li.org/ #196285 | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss at lists.ibiblio.org
Source Mage GNU/Linux - Disk Guru
IRC : vlaaad
Jabber : vlaaad at amessage.be
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/sm-discuss/attachments/20050226/7bdfb597/attachment.bin
More information about the SM-Discuss