On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 04:36:44PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
At least to me my work on Haskell in Debian feels more than pretending,
and from personal experience with the creators of the language, I have
strong doubts that they are Idiots.
They are not, they are very smart, but they are
Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
Assuming we ship Go libraries compiled as shared libraries, where do we
get the SONAME from? There is no mechanism for Go libraries to declare
an ABI break. Inventing one and asking all upstream projects to adopt it
On 05/02/2013 18:53, Steve McIntyre wrote:
FFS, yet another new language where the implementors have refused to
think ahead and consider ABI handling? Idiots. :-(
I totally agree with you here.
Considering the mess that we already have with (for example) Haskell
in this respect, I would vote
Hi,
Am Dienstag, den 05.02.2013, 10:53 + schrieb Steve McIntyre:
Paul Wise wrote:
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
Assuming we ship Go libraries compiled as shared libraries, where do we
get the SONAME from? There is no mechanism for Go libraries to declare
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 04:36:44PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
At least to me my work on Haskell in Debian feels more than pretending,
and from personal experience with the creators of the language, I have
strong doubts that they are Idiots.
In fact I don’t see how you can have modern
Hi,
Am Dienstag, den 05.02.2013, 17:03 +0100 schrieb Adam Borowski:
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 04:36:44PM +0100, Joachim Breitner wrote:
It's not a matter of a little infrastructural complication, it's about
having the slightest chance of reasonable security support -- or even
regular bug fixes,
* Adam Borowski:
If there is a bug in library A, if you use static linking, you need to
rebuild every single library B that uses A, then rebuild every C that
uses B, then finally every single package in the archive that uses any
of these libraries.
But wouldn't it be great if all the people
On Tue, 05 Feb 2013, Joachim Breitner wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 05.02.2013, 17:03 +0100 schrieb Adam Borowski:
Just imagine what would happen if libc6 would be statically
linked, and a security bug happens inside (like, in the stub
resolver). Rebuilding the world on every update might be
Hi Matthias,
Matthias Klose d...@debian.org writes:
Am 31.01.2013 13:02, schrieb Hilko Bengen:
2. -fno-split-stack
Otherwise I could not link executables and got the following error
message:
/usr/bin/ld.bfd.real: cindex: hidden symbol `__morestack' in
Hi Hilko,
Hilko Bengen ben...@debian.org writes:
Sure. See the Makefile at the end of this mail. Please note that I
[...]
Thanks for the instructions. I reproduced them and got shared libraries
plus dynamically linked binaries.
Aside from details about the split stack flags, now one big
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 7:14 AM, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
Assuming we ship Go libraries compiled as shared libraries, where do we
get the SONAME from? There is no mechanism for Go libraries to declare
an ABI break. Inventing one and asking all upstream projects to adopt it
seems unlikely to
* Michael Stapelberg:
Can you please list the full instructions you did to accomplish building
sparse/index/regexp as a shared library?
Sure. See the Makefile at the end of this mail. Please note that I don't
really know what I'm doing here -- just tried a few things and tried to
make sense of
Am 31.01.2013 13:02, schrieb Hilko Bengen:
2. -fno-split-stack
Otherwise I could not link executables and got the following error
message:
/usr/bin/ld.bfd.real: cindex: hidden symbol `__morestack' in
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.7/libgcc.a/morestack.o) is referenced
by DSO
13 matches
Mail list logo
