Jason Bacon <bacon4000%gmail.com@localhost> writes: > On 12/29/17 00:17, David Holland wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 08:47:16PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote: >> > > This is icky, because it does mean programs that build with 4.8 may >> > > link against glibmm which built with 4.9. >> > >> > And, atkmm does not build against glibmm. So I object to my own idea ;-) >> > This seems more complicated than I thought... >> >> I'd expect all the *mm would need 4.9... might also want to tag >> libsigc++, which is their common infrastructure. >> > Is this relevant here? > > https://wiki.netbsd.org/pkgsrc/gcc/ > > * C++ packages that are linked together should be built with the same > compiler, because the standard library ABI is not necessarily the > same for each compiler version > * While C packages can be built with mixed versions, the binary should > be linked with the higher version because the support library is > backwards compatible but not forward compatible. > > It may be necessary for all dependent packages to inherit the minimum > GCC version. Yes, It is basically necessary for everything to be built with the same version. But, that's a huge change, and I don't want to have massive change now, especially since it's not the right long-term solution. > I haven't had this issue on CentOS. I often build libraries with > gcc4[89] and link them with the Yum 4.4.7 compiler, but the ABIs might > not be as uniform on other platforms. Interesting, but the build of gtkmm fails hard early on with a linking error, when I have glibmm built with 4.9.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature