To help more developers(Including Solaris/Linux/MAC...) involve in this 
feature development, it's better to keep two versions of Cairo before 
its next release I think.

-Alfred

Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
> Add patches (the diff between the latest release and what you need)
> to our cairo build.
>
> Laca
>
> On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 23:39 +0800, Alfred Peng wrote:
>   
>> The Cairo library is also under development, and the version Firefox 
>> depends on is newer than the latest released one. So it's just a 
>> development cycle problem. At last, there will be only one version of 
>> cairo in our system. :-)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Alfred
>>
>> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>>     
>>> If you're doing this for the Firefox being shipped in Solaris, the only
>>> correct answer is to work with the GNOME team to have them deliver the
>>> version of Cairo you need so that there is only one version to worry 
>>> about.
>>>
>>>     -Alan Coopersmith-           alan.coopersmith at sun.com
>>>      Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
>>>
>>> Alfred Peng wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>>    I've got a library linking question. Hope that you can give me 
>>>> some suggestion.
>>>>
>>>>    Firefox needs the latest cairo library to support its new layout 
>>>> development. However, the cairo library bundled in Solaris11/Linux 
>>>> currently is old. So Firefox makes its own cairo snapshot during the 
>>>> feature development. A cairo static library(a.a for later reference) 
>>>> is generated from the source code and linked to a dynamic 
>>>> library(b.so for later reference). At the same time, gtk2 library 
>>>> depends on the system cairo library(c.so) and c.so will be linked to 
>>>> b.so also. I know it's a little mess :-[
>>>>
>>>>    On ubuntu with gcc, b.so will call the functions in library a.a 
>>>> and works well. But on Solaris11 with our sunCC(CC: Sun C++ 5.8 
>>>> 2005/10/13), b.so will call the functions in library c.so and it 
>>>> crashes.
>>>>
>>>>    Do we have any option to make b.so call the functions in a.a 
>>>> instead of c.so on Solaris 11? Or it depends on the linking order of 
>>>> the object files and libraries?
>>>>
>>>>    I don't know whether I've made myself clear about this problem. If 
>>>> not, please let me know.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> -Alfred
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> tools-linking mailing list
>>>> tools-linking at opensolaris.org
>>>>         
>> _______________________________________________
>> tools-linking mailing list
>> tools-linking at opensolaris.org
>>     
>
>   


Reply via email to