There are differences between versions of Motif too. So how
on earth could you set such a goal.
Maybe we should just publish that we're often binary compatible.
Danny
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 16:00, Martin Simmons wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 07:55:52 -0500, "Mark Hatch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> Mark> Joseph and I had an offline discussion on the problems he observed with OM
> Mark> and mxaudio. The final resolution was that he only had a binary form of
> Mark> mxaudio and apparently that had been built with\Motif 1.2 (probably either
> Mark> lesstif originally or Motif 1.2 from Metrolink). And since Motif 2.1 is not
> Mark> upwards compatible with Motif 1.2 (lots of internal structures have been
> Mark> moved around and changed), there was no way that mxaudio would link with any
> Mark> version of OM 2.x (where x = 1 or 2).
>
> Mark> Fortunately for him (and others), lesstif is apparently 100% binary
> Mark> compatible. So he is all set now. (BTW: we've seen this similar level of
> Mark> compatibility with our ViewKit C++ Motif framework. Hat's off to your
> Mark> effort!)
>
> It would be nice if it was true, but unfortunately Lesstif is not even 100%
> binary compatible with other versions of Lesstif :-(
>
> __Martin
> _______________________________________________
> Lesstif mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://terror.hungry.com/mailman/listinfo/lesstif
--
Danny Backx - danny.backx-at-skynet.be
_______________________________________________
Lesstif mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://terror.hungry.com/mailman/listinfo/lesstif
