On Apr 28, 2008, at 10:00 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Does this mean that stdcxx 4.2.1 isn't binary compatible with
4.2.0 on Darwin or that there is a problem with a dependency
on some system library or something like that? (I can't tell
for sure from the output you pasted below.) Either way, is
this something new? (I don't recall it being mentioned when
we did our binary compatibility testing two weeks ago.)
It's most likely a problem with the way the library is built.
The first time I saw it was a couple weeks ago while testing binary
compatibility.
Brad.
