From: Domenico Andreoli (cavokz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-04 22:25:18
On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 09:41:05AM +0400, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> Martin Wille wrote:
> > Vladimir Prus wrote:
> >> What is going to happen? It sounds like you've omitted some part of
> >> your email.
> > The message looks complete here.
> Let me clarify -- the message goes like this:
> > Now Joe User writes his app on the Fedora system and links Boost.DateTime
> > using the familiar -lboost_date_time switch. He builds the app and
> > tries it on both his Fedora system and the friend's Debian one. What is
> > going to happen?
> > BTW, ....
> So either "What is going to happen?" is a question to recipients of the
> email (and I don't know what exactly is being asked), or Domenico meant
> do tell what is going to happen, but did not.
> The only reason why said app won't work on one of the systems is possibly
> binary incompatibility between gcc/libstdc++/libc, which is probably
> not what's being discussed.
I was referring to this reason.
I find that fully decorated names are a wanted feature to achieve sane
binary portability. The case I mentioned might even run but crash subtly.
If instead the toolset was encoded in the library name, app would not
even run, saving the user from the debugger.
This is a binary compatibility issue induced by current --layout=system.
-----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok
---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936 4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk