Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Flavien Bridault <f.bridault AT fra.net>]

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[0] 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

>
> -sandalle
>
> --
> 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
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss

-- 
Flavien Bridault
Source Mage GNU/Linux - Disk Guru

IRC : vlaaad
Jabber : vlaaad AT amessage.be

http://www.sourcemage.org

Attachment: pgp0AIuAUeOUx.pgp
Description: PGP signature