[lsb-discuss] standardized C++ apps?

Wichmann, Mats D mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Mon Aug 1 05:22:56 PDT 2005


>Fedora Core 4 uses gcc 4.0 and thusly the gcc 4.0 ABI, as far 
>as I know (I'm a SuSE Linux user).

As far as we can tell, this is compatible with 3.4.x. Haven't
yet heard of a case where it isn't.

>> If you are seeing some additional problems that LSB 3.0 will not fix,
>> let's discuss this here.
>
>Will the C++ part of LSB 3.0 be mandatory?  Correct me if I'm 
>wrong (please), but wasn't the C++ ABI part of the LSB 2.0 
>optional? 

Not really.  It was made a separate module so it would be
easy to separate from what was sent to ISO as a draft
international standard, but was (is) mandatory in the LSB 
usage context.

>I know there was a big controversy on what ABI the
>LSB decided on.

A bit, yes.  It was really a timing issue, whether a
particular abi version lined up with various vendor product
plans or not. That was unfortunate, but the large abi shift
made by gcc around that time kind of forced the issue. There
seems to be real commitment to keep the abi stable upstream
now.





More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list