| 1 |
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Anthony G. Basile <blueness@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 04/26/15 23:21, Duncan wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> Diego Elio Pettenò posted on Sun, 26 Apr 2015 17:41:04 +0100 as excerpted: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>> On 25 April 2015 at 16:57, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>>> Of course, one thing that could make the process faster would be if C++ |
| 9 |
>>>> based packages were marked some way. |
| 10 |
>>> |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>>> revdep-rebuild --soname 'libstdc\+\+.so.*' |
| 13 |
>>> |
| 14 |
>>> should do the trick. Stuff that does not link the library (statically |
| 15 |
>>> linked or using libsupc++) should not really matter. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> Thanks. Obvious in hindsight. =:^) |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> just saw this. This works unless you have two versions of gcc installed. |
| 21 |
> The c++11 abi emitted by gcc-4.7 and 4.8 are different and since you link |
| 22 |
> against the latest version (see the ordering of directories in |
| 23 |
> /etc/ld.so.conf.d/05gcc-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.conf), building with the earlier |
| 24 |
> gcc can cause breakage. We may not want to support such a situation but I'd |
| 25 |
> like to. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
As I understand it, a given version of gcc links objects against its |
| 28 |
own version of libstdc++, but the "latest" version of libstdc++ is |
| 29 |
loaded by ld.so at runtime. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Maybe that's what you meant, but I wanted to clarify that. And if I am |
| 32 |
wrong on that, please correct me. ^_^ |
Archives