[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD
From: |
Olly Betts |
Subject: |
Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD |
Date: |
Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:52:19 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
slrn/0.9.8.1 (Linux) |
On 2005-09-23, Peter O'Gorman <address@hidden> wrote:
> I have no statistics for how many shared libraries are written in c++ but do
> not take advantage of the standard c++ library, at a guess I'd say that the
> majority use some libstdc++ features.
It's perhaps worth noting that not linking libstdc++ to a library that
requires it means it fails to dlopen() - a fatal error. Whereas linking
libstdc++ to a library which only needs libsupc++ just means that it is
linked to a shared library containing more than it needs (AIUI,
libsupc++ is just a very cut down version of libstdc++).
Linking to libstdc++ when you could get away with libsupc++ is
essentially irrelevant if you're running any other dynamically linked
C++ programs. In fact it's probably slightly better if everything uses
libstdc++ than some use libsupc++!
To me defaulting to C++ pulling in libstdc++ makes most sense, probably
with an ability to override for the minority who don't require it and
care.
Cheers,
Olly
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, (continued)
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, Peter O'Gorman, 2005/09/22
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, Jacob Meuser, 2005/09/22
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, Ralf Wildenhues, 2005/09/23
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, Olly Betts, 2005/09/26
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, Jacob Meuser, 2005/09/27
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, Peter O'Gorman, 2005/09/27
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, Olly Betts, 2005/09/27
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, Jacob Meuser, 2005/09/28
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, Olly Betts, 2005/09/28
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD, Peter O'Gorman, 2005/09/23
- Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD,
Olly Betts <=