Linked by Joost van der Sluis on Mon 10th Sep 2007 16:03 UTC
Permalink for comment 271192
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-11
"It's much worse with Qt4. Since Qt is done in C++ anyone using non-C++ has to use a "C-Wrapper" lib. This lib is directly dependant on specific version of Qt4 (4.0, 4.1 etc.) so redistribution is next to impossible without recompilation (typical linux world), or carrying your own qt/gtk libs."
C++ ABI is a PITA on linux, no question about it (I would say C++ is broken from a ABI point of view anyway). But otherwise, I don't get your problems: breaking glibc between gcc2 and 4 is really not a problem, they are like what, ten years different ? Also, binary incompatibility also arise on windows (I got a problem recently with file descriptor not being compatible between slightly different MS C runtime).
I tended to think that binary compatibility was the major problem on linux, but maybe the problem really is shared library: http://www.sagecertification.org/publications/library/proceedings/u...