On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Stefan <luke1...@posteo.de> wrote: >...
> And now I also remember and realize that these removed symbols were > actually private ones never intended to be exported (aka: double _ in > the name). So 1.8/1.9 corrected this and ABI compatibility for these > were intentionally broken. > Hunh? No compatibility was broken. Those were private symbols, so removing them was perfectly acceptable. They are/were *not* part of the (defined) ABI. Did you see something else? Some other breakage? Or are you just referring to the difference between actual and defined/public ABI? Cheers, -g
