On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 01:54:57PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > 1) Should libstdc++-dev dependencies be made "artificially" strict in > packages destined for sid so that it's harder for packages built > against, say, libstdc++3 to accidentally sneak in and start regressing > the C++ ABI transition progress?
Well, this isn't a problem for buildds, because I made libstdc++5-dev the preference. > 2) Is libstdc++5-3.3 ABI-compatible with libstdc+5? Does the former > have any symbols that the latter lacks? I *believe* it's completely ABI-compatible, but I could be wrong. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org
pgpAwpUvNEvUj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
