delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
DomainKey-Signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id |
:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post | |
:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date | |
:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type | |
:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=fd7noXpTBKAMyUN8 | |
FRF+Wy6bSd8IUoOkDid/fOhrXXUzO+Kj9kKZNwjN3kiD2SW0ohZcEprc9PWpzZ2S | |
VXFD+UwGLOCXf1N7cd+hM/+9HEjl4iEyXW1z9QuAR0ZuHvuJf4PeOUtmhReJixVf | |
xdepI4m2qcAUvtrQmRM3gVG2YG0= | |
DKIM-Signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id |
:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post | |
:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date | |
:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type | |
:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=ar4/hMgiseeUbFPLE4Wzvw | |
LkYik=; b=TU/vmdoVOH9J5pY7+Bk80yhcyfaMASDXUNooMtywHJQ7p++tmLCTKx | |
3EVIyuysVD0ghRKWpz1stt8HLWZQnWaUNiVrokbHX5gE7LQTnHyllz8glEFsuAKz | |
lRnT/uuHE9GauZ9Kdd90IKqchUhpmoN7WKrmChF4TKIG26NNjxdH0= | |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.com> |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Authentication-Results: | sourceware.org; auth=none |
X-Virus-Found: | No |
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: | No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 |
X-HELO: | limerock02.mail.cornell.edu |
X-CornellRouted: | This message has been Routed already. |
Subject: | Re: Updated: gcc-5.2.0-1 (Test x86/x86_64) |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
References: | <560BC46D DOT 3060500 AT gmail DOT com> <560C0863 DOT 70505 AT tiscali DOT co DOT uk> <560C6369 DOT 7060602 AT gmail DOT com> <560C71FB DOT 4030005 AT tiscali DOT co DOT uk> <560D2F6D DOT 90608 AT gmail DOT com> <5613F632 DOT 1080205 AT t-online DOT de> |
From: | Ken Brown <kbrown AT cornell DOT edu> |
Message-ID: | <56140A2F.3000004@cornell.edu> |
Date: | Tue, 6 Oct 2015 13:51:43 -0400 |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
In-Reply-To: | <5613F632.1080205@t-online.de> |
X-IsSubscribed: | yes |
On 10/6/2015 12:26 PM, Christian Franke wrote: > cyg Simple wrote: >> On 9/30/2015 7:36 PM, David Stacey wrote: >>> On 30/09/15 23:34, JonY wrote: >>>> On 10/1/2015 00:05, David Stacey wrote: >>>>> On 30/09/15 12:15, JonY wrote: >>>>>> gcc-5.2.0-1 has been uploaded for 32bit and 64bit Cygwin. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is the first series of the 5.x releases, and should be >>>>>> considered >>>>>> as experimental as such. >>>>> Have you managed to work around the ABI change in gcc-5 [1], or will >>>>> this require a mass rebuild at the point gcc-5 becomes 'current'? >>>>> >>>>> [1] -http://developerblog.redhat.com/2015/02/05/gcc5-and-the-c11-abi/ >>>> As far as I know, every gcc release will break C++ ABI, so it would >>>> mean >>>> rebuilding everything C++. >>> According to the Red Hat blog above, the last time g++ caused an ABI >>> change was back in the 3.x days, so it hasn't happened for a while. Ah >>> well, we have maintainers for most packages in Cygwin, so we'll have to >>> co-ordinate a rebuild. >> Regardless, JonY is correct. Every C++ release, regardless of the >> vendor, causes an ABI break with shared libraries and the naming of the >> object elements (mangled names). > > Probably not in this 4.X -> 5.X case. Otherwise the new cygstdc++-6.dll > should IMO be renamed to -6.1, -7 or similar. > > A diff of exported symbols of cygstdc++-6.dll 4.9.3-1 and 5.2.0 shows > that the new version only adds new symbols. > > > Results of a quick build check with smartmontools package: > > - Existing package which was built with g++ 4.9.2 runs with 5.2.0 > cygstdc++-6.dll and cyggcc_s-1.dll. > > - A rebuild with g++ 5.2.0 does not run with 4.9.3 cygstdc++-6.dll due > to missing symbols. This is as expected because 5.X adds a new C++11 > conforming std::string which is used by default > (https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/using_dual_abi.html). > > - A rebuild with g++ 5.2.0 and CXXFLAGS=-D_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0 runs > with old 4.9.3 cygstdc++-6.dll and cyggcc_s.dll. > > So there is probably no need to rebuild existing C++ packages. What about the following scenario: Package P links against library L. Library L is rebuilt to use the new ABI. Isn't it possible that package P will then have to be rebuilt as well? Ken -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |