On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 04:20:27PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote: > Um, there have been plenty of cases in the past where the top level set > something correctly and the subdirectory makefiles overrode it with an > incorrect setting.
Ah, but once we have a globally correct setting in the top level we can brutally eliminate settings further down. This does require toplevel bootstrap. > In private mail someone suggested $ORIGIN to me as a possible solution. > I really don't mean to be giving the impression that these are > intractable problems; I just don't want them considered non-problems. $ORIGIN is nifty; but do you know how portable it is? I've got no clue. > > > I'd want to see at least two major releases with no libstdc++ soname > > > bump and no problems reported, before I had confidence we'd gotten > > > it right. > > > > You mean, like GCC 3.4 and GCC 4.0? > > If GCC 4.1 comes out without anyone having reported 3.4/4.0 > incompatibilities, and continues to provide libstdc++.so.6, then yes, > that would be like what I mean. However, the active development on the > libstdc++.so.7 branch means that we haven't even started the clock > running on this criterion yet. That would be three major releases unless you're counting differently than I am. My point was that we did preserve the soname between 3.4 and 4.0, and no one's reported trouble because of that yet - and I have fairly high confidence that no one will. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery, LLC
