| 1 |
On 18/09/17 16:36, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am Montag, 18. September 2017, 14:28:37 CEST schrieb M. J. Everitt: |
| 3 |
>> <snip> |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> Would a virtual help any? Probably overlooking a good number of factors, |
| 6 |
>> but wasn't mentioned yet ... |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
> So far I don't see how... Virtual would mean that the same functionality is |
| 9 |
> provided by different packages, and that they can be exchanged at runtime. |
| 10 |
> However, for rpc there are different library *names* (sonames) to be linked, |
| 11 |
> and for nls the soversion is different... Even if the headers were identical, |
| 12 |
> that wouldnt work :/ |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
Gotcha, thanks for the explanation. So you'd even need a common API |
| 15 |
(header, etc) to be able to do some fudgery linking the lib names even. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
MJE |
Archives