On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 07:44:05PM +0200, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
>
> I can see no runtime problems, since thnigs are linked by install_name;
> even in the same binary, you could conceivably have 2 different symbols
> coming resp. from libfoo1.dylib and libfoo2.dylib.
> But here gcc would just link with cloog and the ppl it was built with,
> while cloog itself will link against whatever ppl it was built with.
> That is no problem.
JF,
You're neglecting the fact that gcc loads the ppl headers via the
cloog headers. So even if gcc and cloog call their respective versions
of the ppl shared libraries, this won't account for possible differences in
the data structures in the two ppl releases. The cloog calls from gcc will
pass ppl data structures as defined by the ppl 0.10.x ABI while
cloog will be assuming data structures as defined by the ppl 0.11
ABI. While you might get away with this, it certainly is playing
Russian roulette with the ABI.
Jack
>
> JF
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by
Make an app they can't live without
Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Subscription management:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
