On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 11:42:40PM +1000, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 09:28:22AM -0400, David Nusinow wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 09:39:23PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote: > > > [Actually, although it's written in C++, AFAIK it only exports a C > > > interface so the transition may not have been necessary. I only > > > realized this yesterday though and I'm not entirely sure a > > > non-transition would be safe.]
> > Christ, not another one. Is there any sort of automated way that we can > > check for these sorts of libraries before messing things up again? I won't > Well, before I go and do the same, can anyone help me by checking > tqsllib? > Ubuntu has transitioned it in their 'universe' to tqsllib1c2. > However none of the exported headers contain the magic :: sign of C++, > so I suspect it's unnecessary. (A recompile to link against > libstdc++6 should be sufficient, without a name change). Yeah, this is another lib with a C++ implementation that only exports a C ABI in its headers. (other telltale signs to look for besides '::', btw are 'use', 'class', 'operator'; but that may obviously give false positives.) The C++ bits within the library are a whole lot of template implementations, and a few internal classes that are only exposed in the headers via C wrappers. If you're sure that nothing out there is using tsqllib internals inappropriately, then there's no need for a package name change. As others have pointed out, ideally in this case you would have a linker script that prevents these internal symbols from being exposed at all in the library symbol table. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
