=?iso-8859-15?q?Fran=E7ois?= Pons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> >the linker will
>> >match them together ? This sounds me a bug in the dynamic linker ?
>>
>> Not in the linker itself, the reason was that the main package and the
>> library were compiled w
Gwenole Beauchesne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Raul Dias wrote:
>
>> >the linker will
>> >match them together ? This sounds me a bug in the dynamic linker ?
>>
>> Not in the linker itself, the reason was that the main package and the
>> library were compiled with different (and
On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Raul Dias wrote:
> >the linker will
> >match them together ? This sounds me a bug in the dynamic linker ?
>
> Not in the linker itself, the reason was that the main package and the
> library were compiled with different (and c++ ABI incompatible) GCCs.
1) Could you please nam
Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >the linker will
> >match them together ? This sounds me a bug in the dynamic linker ?
>
> Not in the linker itself, the reason was that the main package and the
> library were compiled with different (and c++ ABI incompatible) GCCs.
This means when you
=?iso-8859-15?q?Fran=E7ois?= Pons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> =?iso-8859-15?q?Fran=E7ois?= Pons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >> >But what do you want exactly, to keep gcc-2.95.3-19cl.src.rpm instead of a new
Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> =?iso-8859-15?q?Fran=E7ois?= Pons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> >But what do you want exactly, to keep gcc-2.95.3-19cl.src.rpm instead of a newer
> >> >gcc which provides the same libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 ?
> >
Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >But what do you want exactly, to keep gcc-2.95.3-19cl.src.rpm instead of a newer
> >gcc which provides the same libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 ?
>
> No. A newer gcc would install a different libstdc++ (different soname).
This is exactly what we want.
> What
=?iso-8859-15?q?Fran=E7ois?= Pons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> >$ rpm -qR xalan-c | grep libstdc
>> >libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3
>> >
>> >$ ldd /usr/bin/testXPath | grep libstdc
>> >libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 => /usr/lib/libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 (0x4
Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >$ rpm -qR xalan-c | grep libstdc
> >libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3
> >
> >$ ldd /usr/bin/testXPath | grep libstdc
> >libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 => /usr/lib/libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 (0x4083d000)
> >
> >$ objdump -x /usr/lib/libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 | gr
=?iso-8859-15?q?Fran=E7ois?= Pons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The problem:
>>
>> Using a C++ application compiling with one gcc that depends on
>> another C++ library that was compiled with another gcc will
>> __not__ work and probably segfaults.
>>
>> T
Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have proposed a new kind of conflict checking for rpm, but
> JBJ is not sure (yet) if rpm is the right place for it.
>
> However URPMI would be a right tool to check for it.
>
> The problem:
>
> Using a C++ application compiling with one gcc that depen
Gwenole Beauchesne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, pascal wrote:
>
>> I am not a programmer but a Merchant Navy Officer, by hoby a very small
>> tester, but sugest it should be great if somme of you could find some scripte
>> or others making transparent capability for compiling ap
12 matches
Mail list logo
