On Thursday 09 June 2011, [email protected] wrote: > On 08/06/2011, at 4:27 AM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 08:58:22 AM Thiago Macieira wrote: > > ... > > > >> LSB has lost track of what's recent. Just take a mildly old / relatively > > > > I don't know whether I misunderstood the idea behind LSB, but even RHEL > > and SLES (forgot the exact versions, they were relatively old), which > > claimed they would comply to the same LSB version, were not binary > > compatible. The STL differed, some function from std::string was inlined > > on the one system and called some internal STL function, which did not > > exist on the other system. Should that have worked ? > > I'm not familiar with the specifics of the particular case you mention, but > there are at least a few possibilities: > > (1) The application using std::string might not have been getting built > with LSB compilers - if you build with the standard g++ compiler, then you > are not talking about LSB anymore. Building with lsbc++ instead puts g++ > into "LSB mode" which should prevent the use of non-LSB symbols/libraries > if things are all working correctly.
So, the only way to get LSB-compliant binaries is to use gcc and e.g. Intel compilers are out of the game ? Alex _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
