On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 04:38:17 (CEST), Felipe Sateler wrote: > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 14:27, Reinhard Tartler <siret...@tauware.de> wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 19:47:47 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: >> >>> I notice, though, that above links only mention API, not ABI. Is it >>> safe to expect library ABI (runtime linkage) to be frozen too if its API >>> (compile time interface) is? >> >> Generally speaking, yes. >> >> (well, unless there are toolchain changes, etc. - very unlikely at this >> stage of squeeze) > > Not really. Reordering of enums, for example, could break ABI while > keeping API compatibility. Same with adding/reordering struct members. > Not relally common, but can happen.
Oh, you're totally right. Somehow I considered these changes as API change as well, but what is meant here is a change that does not affect buildability. Other API compatible changes in C++ would e.g. include addition of additional parameters to existing methods with default parameters. This would affect ABI as well. I was clearly confused yesterday, sorry. -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers