[M3devel] libXaw.so.6 again

[Jay]

The age of the toolchain is not the problem. And gcc has little/nothing to do with it (unless you worry about C++ exceptionhandling/RTTI ABI) Linux/OpenBSD/FreeBSD/NetBSD seemingly don't try to retain binary compatibility. I don't know if security fixes are too blame but I doubt it.


Shipping assembly source would help -- where the breakage is only the .so name. I want to ship C source.

 - Jay (briefly/pocket-sized-computer-aka-phone)

On May 14, 2012, at 5:24 AM, "Daniel Alejandro Benavides D." <dabenavidesd at yahoo.es> wrote:

> Hi all:
> 'forwards compatibility' is not achieved by any of OSes because of Gcc merits as it should be, but backwards also don't say a word as expected, mainly due "security issues", so I don't know if commercial *ix are, at least have the sources should make that easier I guess; I once tried to compile a virtual machine package and I was told that first find my distro's 'minimum common factor' and cross-compile to that system and then recompile everything on it, but I solved hacking the virtual machine sources, so my guess is that you can have 'forwards compatibility' if you can get a sufficient old version of your tool chain and OS to cross-compile from newer.
> Modula-3 had this nice thing of emitting the "assembly sources" and emit native code for the platform in-situ and relink everything (so sort of eliminate the requisite of having an older compiler, but just native gcc nice to do). Maybe this would be a nice to have item for next releases, wouldn't be?
> Thanks in advance
> 
>  
> 
> --- El lun, 14/5/12, Jay K <jay.krell at cornell.edu> escribió:
> 
> De: Jay K <jay.krell at cornell.edu>
> Asunto: Re: [M3devel] libXaw.so.6 again
> Para: "Mika Nystrom" <mika at async.caltech.edu>, dragisha at m3w.org
> CC: "m3devel" <m3devel at elegosoft.com>
> Fecha: lunes, 14 de mayo, 2012 02:20
> 
> Apparently free/open Unices (Linux, OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD) have no binary compatibility.
> I find this very surprising, crazy, disappointing, but apparently true.
> We must distribute source to achieve the usual expected portability.
>  C source at that, to achieve the usual expected buildability.
> Or maybe I'm confused.
> The various commerical systems (Solaris, AIX, Irix, VMS, Windows, Darwin, HP-UX) do/did not have this problem.
> 
> 
>  - Jay
> 
> 
> > To: dragisha at m3w.org
> > Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 23:51:15 -0700
> > From: mika at async.caltech.edu
> > CC: m3devel at elegosoft.com
> > Subject: Re: [M3devel] libXaw.so.6 again
> > 
> > =?utf-8?Q?Dragi=C5=A1a_Duri=C4=87?= writes:
> > ...
> > >Another is to ln -s existing libXaw.so.7 to libXaw.so.6
> > ...
> > 
> > "Not guaranteed to work" but almost always does, right?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3devel/attachments/20120514/00c540b1/attachment-0002.html>