>>>>> On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:08:52 +0100, Danny Backx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:

  Danny> There are differences between versions of Motif too. So how
  Danny> on earth could you set such a goal.

Yes, I know it is technically difficult due to the Xt object model.

The main problem I've seen on Linux is that the shared library versioning is
not used with sufficent precision by Lesstif.  E.g. we have precompiled
software that runs on Red Hat 7 with some old version of Lesstif and it will
still start on Red Hat 9 (which ships with a newer version of Lesstif) but
then it will crash and burn because of binary incompatibility.  The best
solution would have been that it fails to start at all on Red Hat 9 due to not
finding correct libXm.so.n.

With Open Motif this situtation works because OM 2.1.30 is in libXm.so.2 and
OM 2.2.2 is in libXm.so.3.  This is also how Motif has worked in the past on
HP-UX (libXm.1, libXm.2 and libXm.3 are versions of Motif 1.2 and libXm.4 is
Motif 2.1).


  Danny> Maybe we should just publish that we're often binary compatible.

Possibly.  I suspect it depends on whether or not the software subclasses Xm
widgets, since that it the really difficult case for binary compatibilty.

__Martin
_______________________________________________
Lesstif mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://terror.hungry.com/mailman/listinfo/lesstif

Reply via email to