On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 23:22:00 -0700 > Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Didn't the GNU people say they had to change it to be more ABI compliant > > > with the 'standard'? > > > > I will believe that when they upgrade their FORTRAN compiler > > to be more compliant with 'the standard'. > > > > Some standards are not worth complying with; I still have yet > > to see anyone tell me exactly what the practical benefit of > > doing this is. > > When X (X > 1) compilers comply to the same ABI standard, I can mix the > results of those compilers (if I see a benefit to do so). > > As we have icc in the ports collection and the base system is compiled > with gcc and I want to be able to link to gcc compiled libs with icc, I > appreciate the effort of the involved parties to try to comply to a > common ABI standard. >
That might be so over in your reality, but over in this really there is tonns of paisn due to the changes and changing libstdc++.so major. Lets not get into "promises" about ABI stability > Bye, > Alexander. > > -- > I believe the technical term is "Oops!" > > http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net > GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7 _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
